You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 10, 2024. It is now read-only.
This information is in the fact that triggered the run which is shown in the table called "Inputs" when you click on the fact ID. It's a huge JSON though so not very discoverable.
As Cicero is a general if-this-then-that machine we should not directly include some very CI- and GitHub-specific information. The planned solution for this is programmable fact rendering which would display facts in some nice GitHub-specific way.
I am not at all impressed by this explanation. Why was our existing CI system replaced by something that is not a CI system? I don't want a general ITTT machine, I want a CI system!
We had to migrate to cicero way earlier than we wanted to because packet.net shut down the datacenter that Hydra was running on. I'm therefore not surprised that the experience is far from that of a purpose-built CI system. CI is one of the things cicero should become great at but it just was not ready for prime time yet.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
The run page's summary at the top is missing some useful information related to the run. Notably it would be helpful to include
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: