Skip to content

Conversation

@ktf
Copy link
Member

@ktf ktf commented Jun 11, 2025

Using WorkflowSpec without an AlgorithmSpec does not make much sense.

Using WorkflowSpec without an AlgorithmSpec does not make much sense.
@ktf ktf requested a review from a team as a code owner June 11, 2025 15:29
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION RELEASES:
To request your PR to be included in production software, please add the corresponding labels called "async-" to your PR. Add the labels directly (if you have the permissions) or add a comment of the form (note that labels are separated by a ",")

+async-label <label1>, <label2>, !<label3> ...

This will add <label1> and <label2> and removes <label3>.

The following labels are available
async-2023-pbpb-apass4
async-2023-pp-apass4
async-2024-pp-apass1
async-2022-pp-apass7
async-2024-pp-cpass0
async-2024-PbPb-apass1
async-2024-ppRef-apass1
async-2024-PbPb-apass2
async-2023-PbPb-apass5

@ktf ktf merged commit 892c49c into AliceO2Group:dev Jun 11, 2025
7 checks passed
mhemmer-cern pushed a commit to mhemmer-cern/AliceO2 that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2025
Using WorkflowSpec without an AlgorithmSpec does not make much sense.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant