CI Behavior Unclear: Workflow Shows “No jobs were run” When Submitting PR

#4 · closed · 1 comments

View on GitHub ↗

NanSike

### Self Checks - [x] I have read the [Contributing Guide](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md) and [Language Policy](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/issues/1542). - [x] I have searched for existing issues [search for existing issues](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/issues), including closed ones. - [x] I confirm that I am using English to submit this report, otherwise it will be closed. - [x] Please do not modify this template :) and fill in all the required fields. ### 1. Is this request related to a challenge you're experiencing? Tell me about your story. I encountered an unexpected behavior in the CI workflow when submitting a pull request. The PR only contained minor non-code changes (such as updating a logo asset), but the CI workflow reported:No jobs were run This caused the entire workflow to be marked as “failed,” even though no tests should logically run for this type of change. From what I understand, the check-changes job correctly detected that no relevant paths were modified, so all downstream jobs were skipped due to their conditional if: statements. However, the workflow ended without running any job at all, which appears to trigger a confusing “failed” run status. It was unexpected because I initially thought something had gone wrong with the CI configuration or my PR. This behavior made it unclear whether the CI was functioning as intended. ### 2. Additional context or comments Here are details that may help: • Workflow file: .github/workflows/main-ci.yml • Behavior: • api-tests, web-tests, vdb-tests, and db-migration-test were all skipped • The reusable workflow style-check also did not run • No fallback job exists, leading to a workflow run with zero executed jobs • Impact: • Minor PRs appear “failed” even though the underlying logic worked as expected • This might confuse contributors who are unfamiliar with the CI setup A potential improvement could be adding a small “no-op” job or ensuring that style-check always runs so that the CI does not produce an empty job list. Screenshot of the CI result (for reference): <img width="458" height="97" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7394ced5-4ba3-448e-af80-617bc09fb64e" /> ### 3. Can you help us with this feature? - [x] I am interested in contributing to this feature.

Comments

github-actions[bot]

Close due to it's no longer active, if you have any questions, you can reopen it.