Skip to content

Removing need for new_problem.yaml to avoid ugly failing on default#150

Open
CIGbalance wants to merge 4 commits intomainfrom
feat/problem_check_cosmetics
Open

Removing need for new_problem.yaml to avoid ugly failing on default#150
CIGbalance wants to merge 4 commits intomainfrom
feat/problem_check_cosmetics

Conversation

@CIGbalance
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@CIGbalance CIGbalance commented Apr 8, 2026

This pull request updates the workflow for checking new problem submissions and improves related documentation and configuration. The main changes are focused on making the workflow more robust and providing better examples for contributors.

Workflow improvements:

  • The GitHub Actions workflow (.github/workflows/new_problem_check.yml) now only runs on pushes to the main branch / pull requests and only if utils/new_problem.yaml has changed, reducing unnecessary workflow runs.
  • The workflow step to run the new problem check now only executes if utils/new_problem.yaml exists, preventing errors when the file is missing.

Documentation and configuration updates:

  • Added a new problem example to utils/README.md to help contributors format their submissions correctly.
  • Removed the template entry from utils/new_problem.yaml to keep the configuration clean and avoid accidental submissions of the template.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 8, 2026 09:14
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR aims to make the “new problem” submission check more robust by avoiding failures when utils/new_problem.yaml is missing, while also updating contributor guidance and cleaning up the template configuration.

Changes:

  • Adjust GitHub Actions triggers/conditions for the new-problem validation workflow.
  • Add a “new problem” example to utils/README.md.
  • Remove the template entry from utils/new_problem.yaml (file is now removed in this branch).

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

File Description
utils/README.md Adds an example snippet for contributors submitting new problems.
utils/new_problem.yaml Removes the template content (file no longer present after the change).
.github/workflows/new_problem_check.yml Limits push triggering to main and skips the validation step if utils/new_problem.yaml is absent.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@kvdblom kvdblom left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Some small things, main thing is to update the instructions. There are also the AI comments, some appear like they might make sense.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed!

utils/README.md Outdated
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should these instructions change now that the file is removed? Explain that they have to create it from the example below?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done!

CIGbalance and others added 3 commits April 8, 2026 11:38
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Updated example problem format from JSON to YAML.
@CIGbalance CIGbalance requested a review from kvdblom April 8, 2026 09:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants