fix(ci): make Slack notifications non-fatal in test_bundles workflow …

[DivitJain26]

…template

---

type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes. report:

• task: lint_filenames status: passed
• task: lint_editorconfig status: passed
• task: lint_markdown status: na
• task: lint_package_json status: na
• task: lint_repl_help status: na
• task: lint_javascript_src status: na
• task: lint_javascript_cli status: na
• task: lint_javascript_examples status: na
• task: lint_javascript_tests status: na
• task: lint_javascript_benchmarks status: na
• task: lint_python status: na
• task: lint_r status: na
• task: lint_c_src status: na
• task: lint_c_examples status: na
• task: lint_c_benchmarks status: na
• task: lint_c_tests_fixtures status: na
• task: lint_shell status: na
• task: lint_typescript_declarations status: passed
• task: lint_typescript_tests status: na
• task: lint_license_headers status: passed ---

#8864.

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

• This PR updates the test_bundles GitHub Actions workflow template to ensure that Slack notification steps do not cause CI failures when Slack configuration is missing or misconfigured.

The change applies only to the workflow template, so it affects newly generated workflows without modifying existing ones.

In forks and local testing environments, Slack secrets are often unavailable.
Currently, failures in the Slack notification step can cause otherwise successful CI jobs to fail.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request has the following related issues:

• [BUG]: bundles are failing to build in the standalone random repository #8864

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

• Yes
• No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

• Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
• Test/benchmark generation
• Documentation (including examples)
• Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".

{{TODO: add disclosure if applicable}}

---

@stdlib-js/reviewers

[kgryte]

Thank you for this PR; however, in this case, the changes are not desired. The reasons are twofold:

1. We recently migrated to pushing messages to Zulip.
2. We would likely not want to ignore CI failing to send messages. Why? Because if we did, how will we know that the workflow is failing to send messages? If we always skip on an error, this failure could be missed entirely, and as messages would not be sent to Zulip, we'd be unaware that anything is amiss.

Thanks again for your interest in stdlib, and we look forward to your future contributions.