As I understood, ./eden hardcoded in collect-info to not fill it from the caller side. We still have ./eden as default. So do we really need the change?

@giggsoff there's a problem with missing archive in new workflows lf-edge/eve#3450 It might not be path, but has to be something

@giggsoff there's a problem with missing archive in new workflows lf-edge/eve#3450 It might not be path, but has to be something

I still not sure that the problem is in path. Checked with added comment # created by collect-info action to eden.yml workflow and looks like I hit the same problem. May the problem be because of the comment?

I see that in case of EdenGCP workflow we have it and seems like difference is only in using github.working directory and this comment. I removed the comment and hope it'll fix things . And being explicit on workflow directory won't worsen it IMHO :)

Without explicit definition of working directory we use ./eden (assume it is different after your change, my previous fix you mentioned in the description was about changing the option) and as I can see in discussion it works, the action is able to find and run shell scripts to obtain required info. So why we should change the working directory if it works?

@giggsoff in this discussion there's a problem that new workflows don't include this archive, two things which are different is using working directory and having this comment. In new workflows which we are calling from eve we are downloading eden and explicitly specifying working directory. My reasoning changing it here is because that way it's explicit. I'm not sure still how GHA are functioning, especially in scenario, where you call them from another repository. If you want, we can remove working directory and clean up comment and try it all together and if it works it's good. If not -- I'd specify working directory and run again

@giggsoff in this discussion there's a problem that new workflows don't include this archive, two things which are different is using working directory and having this comment. In new workflows which we are calling from eve we are downloading eden and explicitly specifying working directory. My reasoning changing it here is because that way it's explicit. I'm not sure still how GHA are functioning, especially in scenario, where you call them from another repository. If you want, we can remove working directory and clean up comment and try it all together and if it works it's good. If not -- I'd specify working directory and run again

Yes, please, remove only comment and keep options, it helps me in my attempt .

@giggsoff removed the comment and workflow directories remain the same