jobs.<job_id>.timeout-minutes description is misleading #7984
Comments
|
@jsoref Thank you for opening this issue |
|
Thanks for opening this issue! I agree that we should mention time limits here. The text in Workflow syntax for GitHub Actions - GitHub Docs could be changed to something like: You or anyone else is welcome to open a PR with this addition. Although you are correct that changing 6 hours to 360 minutes in Usage limits, billing, and administration would be more consistent across articles, I recommend keeping it as 6 hours so that unit comparison within the article is easier (e.g. job limit is 6 hours, and workflow limit is 72 hours). |
|
Hello, I opened #8362 to solve this. |
|
@skedwards88, @lucalves: I wouldn't write it that way. It isn't technically wrong, but it's too easy for someone to misparse. (I'm currently dealing with another project which is failing to properly parse an RFC.) You need to include text that hints that the jobs value is clamped by a second value. Or similarly that if the value exceeds the second value, it is ignored and that second value is honored instead. |


What article on docs.github.com is affected?
https://docs.github.com/en/actions/reference/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#jobsjob_idtimeout-minutes
What part(s) of the article would you like to see updated?
Additional information
The text isn't technically wrong, but it's misleading.
Yes, if you use a self-hosted runner, you can set a value that's larger than 360, but if you are using GitHub hosted runners, then this limit is actually a hard limit:
https://docs.github.com/en/actions/reference/usage-limits-billing-and-administration#usage-limits
6*60 = 360
Problems:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: