paths-filter VS vim-fugitive

I also set up recently the policy to onl use merge commits on stable branch, as otherwise the path filter^1 in the workflows would not detect correctly which files changed in a PR.

[1] https://github.com/dorny/paths-filter

I truly don't understand why this isn't more widely discussed (I've seen several "GH Actions Gotchas" where this isn't mentioned). Many of the community actions also seem to be designed to run as short jobs to paper around missing features (for ex: https://github.com/dorny/paths-filter ), that end up eating up an enormous amount of your minutes budget.

If that isn’t sufficient, there are a number of third party workflow steps that enable conditional builds with extra flexibility like https://github.com/dorny/paths-filter

You can use paths-filter to give yourself a bunch of conditional outputs to test against for separate jobs.

That's brilliant. dorny/paths-filter looks like it can eliminate my enumerate job, and then I don't have to concern myself with all this data passing between jobs.

There’s an awkward gotcha/incompatibility between “Required status checks” and workflows that get skipped [1], eg due to setting a “paths” property of a push/pull_request workflow trigger [2].

The checks associated with the workflow don’t run and stay in a pending state, preventing the PR from being merged.

The only workaround I’m aware of is to use an action such as paths-filter [3] instead at the job level.

A further, related frustration/limitation - you can _only_ set the “paths” property [2] at the workflow level (i.e. not per-job), so those rules apply to all jobs in the workflow. Given that you can only build a DAG of jobs (ie “needs”) within a single workflow, it makes it quite difficult to do anything non trivial in a monorepo.

[1]: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/configuring-branches...

[2]: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/workflow-...

[3]: https://github.com/dorny/paths-filter

We are interested in running a linter only against the modified files. Let's say, we take a look at the provided repo, if I update dags/dummy.py I don't want to waste time and resources running the linter against main.py. For this purpose we use Paths Filter GitHub Action, which is very flexible.

In the spirit of the #ActionsHackathon21, you can see I'm taking advantage of the checkout action GitHub provides and the Paths Filter action by dorny to create the desired workflow. I'm also using the Gistblog Action I created for this hackathon which handles managing all the blog posts as Gists. I'd like to explore Composite actions soon to see if I can reduce all of this to a single action making setup even easier.

the only reason I do some git stuff in vim and not _always_ in the shell, is because tpope is very thoughtful and fugitive.vim provides nice ways to deal with hunks or hunk partials (visually selecting a range within a hunk, for i.e.)

https://github.com/tpope/vim-fugitive/blob/master/doc/fugiti...

I agree, navigating blame history is incredibly useful, if only to save you from asking the wrong person about a particular change.

Vim's Fugitive[1] can do this and also in Textmate to. So I would hope that most editor git plugins can.

1. https://github.com/tpope/vim-fugitive

Git: vim-fugitive and gitsigns.nvim

You'll want to invest the time in learning Magit, which will change your life once you get the hang of it (and I was a heavy user of Fugitive in Vim previously!), and it's unlikely you'll find a better integration with GDB anywhere else on the planet than with Emacs, though I can't say that empirically. You just need to take the plunge and start learning it, then cut over and take the hit in productivity one day when you're feeling adventurous. You'll ultimately become far more powerful than you've ever been. Especially if you delve into elisp over time. I use Spacemacs, which is bloated and has bugs, but it has so many features that I haven't undertaken the massive endeavor to replace it from scratch yet.

For an option that works on Vim, if you already use tpope's vim-fugitive, there's vim-rhubarb (for GitHub) and fugitive-gitlab.vim (for GitLab).

I replace vim-fugitive with :! git

The only thing I truly miss from Emacs is [Magit](https://magit.vc/) since I still consider it the best git wrapper available. It is just too good. Unfortunately [Neogit](https://github.com/TimUntersberger/neogit) is not quite there yet although I hope it makes it at some point. I didn't like [Fugitive]https://github.com/tpope/vim-fugitive), but I ended up finding a good enough workaround by using [Lazygit](https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit) through [Toggleterm](https://github.com/akinsho/toggleterm.nvim).

I do think VSCode is a great tool and I recommend it frequently to people, but I still want to set the record straight here. Yes, vim is obviously limited in the sense that as a CLI app it doesn't draw it's own PDF or HTML windows, that's fair. But it can remote control your favorite PDF viewer or browser for roughly the same functionality. I'm currently writing my thesis using vimtex and it's quite smooth. And all the other stuff you mention is implemented quite competently by various plugins like vim-fugitive, coc.nvim, vimspector and copilot.vim.

Edit: je viens de trouver [https://github.com/tpope/vim-fugitive de Val