One check job

[altendky]

Draft for:

• [x] Revisit after #291 and #287 expand the CI matrix coverage
• [x] Adjust so that all check outputs are present but any single one will result in failure
  • Using if: always() like this makes all three run even when a previous step has failed. This isn't great but I don't have a better working solution and running a few extra steps that will likely fail as well when there's an oddball failure in setup steps doesn't seem super problematic.
  • Here's an example failing build.
    • https://github.com/twisted/towncrier/pull/292/checks?check_run_id=1508471988
    • 

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #292 (f0db0e3) into master (15644ca) will not change coverage. The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #292   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.32%   95.32%           
=======================================
  Files          20       20           
  Lines        1027     1027           
  Branches      104      104           
=======================================
  Hits          979      979           
  Misses         27       27           
  Partials       21       21           

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update 15644ca...f0db0e3. Read the comment docs.

[altendky]

Hmm... but if: always() will always run those steps even if maybe the checkout step fails. That's not the intent here.

[altendky]

@adiroiban, since we've now got 27 'jobs' thus requiring scrolling (at least on the main PR page) regardless, I don't personally see this as an improvement. That said, the check job does have separate steps for each check such that you don't have to dig through a single log to get potentially multiple sets of errors, so it doesn't make things a hassle either. If this wasn't what you had expressed interest in, let me know. If you like it, go ahead and merge.

[altendky]

Also, with all these jobs forcing vertical scrolling in all cases, is it still useful to have the newsfragment/lint/manifest hidden a layer down instead of being immediately visibly at the top level which is which? This is the bit I don't understand the benefit of.

[adiroiban]

Should I try a setup like this in an effort to allow all info to be visible even in the short little space provided in the popup you shared? Rather than shuffling around what you get to see.

Nope. Just merge is as it is :) Thanks

---

is it still useful to have the newsfragment/lint/manifest hidden a layer down instead of being immediately visibly at the top level which is which? This is the bit I don't understand the benefit of.

As you prefer :) It was a minor comment.