Show branch when using workflow_dispatch

[nichmj01]

Currently, when you trigger a workflow manually using on workflow_dispatch, the workflow doesn't tell you which branch it was run on, while on push and on pull_request runs do. It would be nice if on workflow_dispatch showed the branch just like those other event triggers. What's interesting is that the branch is known since I can filter by branch, it's just not shown on the list.

Requests for this functionality are also mentioned in #13689 and #11396. I figured it would be useful to call it out specifically since it seems like this would be a bit easier to implement vs the larger request in those other discussions.

[gabrielrra]

I really think that would be great

[nnellans]

This seems like pretty basic functionality that should be implemented. Why this is taking so long I have no idea.

[ajsharma12541]

+1

[dmalyshevmarinexchange]

Looking forward to this feature!

[ghost]

+1

[babismylonas]

This is still not implemented? Indeed it's pretty basic functionality and also very important, since you can't distinguish on which branch the same workflow ran in the past!

[shobhit-tiwari-maersk]

+1 really hard to figure out which branch was used

[CaBazaga]

Even more, some actions from market use the target branch name for it's work but, as manual dispatches, even though they ask u which branch to target, does not provide that info on the event (or the way other triggers do) makes some actions fail or be less worthy,.

Specific case is a code analysis tool wich sends reports to third party site (their own), missing the branch name makes the report useless there.

[dweller23]

A partial solution would be leverage run-name introduced almost a year ago: https://github.blog/changelog/2022-09-26-github-actions-dynamic-names-for-workflow-runs/

According to the docs over here:
https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#run-name

you can pass github context variable, and you can use ref value there. Not the prettiest formatting, but does the job.

So an example would be having something like that in the top level of the workflow:

run-name: Manually triggered workflow from ${{ github.ref }}

[jbm00n]

I'd prefer a proper integration from GH UI but this is a nice workaround, thanks!

I use ${{ github.ref_name }} for a shorter branch name (without the refs/heads part)

[nichmj01]

Thanks for the workaround suggestion! Not an ideal solution but reasonable.

[ghost]

This works, however it means adding more information to a run name that may already be heavily populated.
eg we have a reusable workflow where the run-name already contains environment to deploy to, deployment type, and component type. Making the run name long enough as it is!
Seems strange that there is a column for the branch, and then not populate that column

[lmjhs]

I agree @jbruce-nex, it's worth noting that the branch filter works correctly so the underlying data is there. Feels like it is just a visual bug where the branch is just not shown for some reason, hoping there may be a very easy fix coming in future.

[anuragsati]

This is still not implemented, any updates on this?

[sirtyman]

For our case the lack of the branch associated with manually triggered workflow causes another issue. When a PR is opened by dependabot, that in turn doesn't have access to secrets, auto-triggered workflows fail. We thought manual trigger is solution for re-running workflows against branch created by dependabot. This is possible. However, these runs, as they have no association with the specific branch, are not being attached to the specific PRs. The only solution in such case is the make fake commit on dependabot branch to re-trigger automatic workflows. Really annoying.

[andrewakim]

👋 Hi everyone. Branch names should now show up on workflow runs triggered via workflow_dispatch!

[anuragsati]

Yes they show up now! Thanks 😄

[Niyaskva]

where is the answer?

[jpcmonster]

What about GHE? :) I don't see it in 3.10.3 :/