Skip to content

Conversation

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb jameslamb commented Sep 8, 2025

Contributes to #6949 and #5035

Proposes moving SWIG jobs to GitHub Actions.

Notes for Reviewers

Branch protections will need to be updated

If this PR is accepted and merged, I'll updated the branch protections so this new swig GitHub Actions workflow is required for PRs.

But what about release artifacts?

Here I'm proposing that artifacts be uploaded to the GitHub Actions artifact store.

See e.g. https://github.com/microsoft/LightGBM/actions/runs/17691426641

Screenshot 2025-09-12 at 11 52 05 PM

Once all CI is moved over, we can figure out how to replace the functionality of "automatically upload all artifacts to the release" that we currently have with Azure DevOps. I think we can use the GitHub CLI for that (e.g. gh run download to get artifacts, gh release upload to push artifacts).

@jameslamb jameslamb changed the title WIP: [ci] [swig] move SWIG jobs to GitHub Actions [ci] [swig] move SWIG jobs to GitHub Actions Sep 13, 2025
@jameslamb jameslamb marked this pull request as ready for review September 13, 2025 05:06

cd "${BUILD_DIRECTORY}"

if [[ $TASK == "swig" ]]; then
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Moving this up avoids the need to set conda and Python-related environment variables in swig.yml

Copy link
Collaborator

@StrikerRUS StrikerRUS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great but there are merge conflicts with other Azure-transferred jobs. Could you please resolve them? Also, I've added some comments mostly for the consistency with other recently merged PRs.

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

Ah, some new conflicts after #7033 😢

@jameslamb jameslamb requested a review from StrikerRUS October 10, 2025 08:18
@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ah yep there will be a few merge conflicts as we go through these. I still think it's worthwhile to do in smaller, easier-to-review patches like this. And the new structure with dedicated workflow files for different types of jobs should hopefully mean fewer merge conflicts if we need to do this type of thing again in the future.

I've resolved conflicts for this PR.

Copy link
Collaborator

@StrikerRUS StrikerRUS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Excellent! Thanks a lot for preparing such comfortable to review series of PRs!

@StrikerRUS StrikerRUS merged commit ce3e312 into master Oct 10, 2025
56 checks passed
@StrikerRUS StrikerRUS deleted the ci/swig-jobs branch October 10, 2025 16:54
@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

Branch protections will need to be updated

Done.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants