After having discovered Concurrency Gates - Buildkite Blog, via other topics in this community, it seems that all of the examples have a throwaway command step used for this purpose. However, since wait steps naturally act as “gates”, and because, without special configuration or use of plugins, throwaway command steps still incur a repository clone cost, wait seems a much more natural way to express concurrency gates in many cases.
Hi, @kgillette!
You wouldn’t be able to use a wait step to declare the gates as you can’t assign a concurrency group to a wait step, which is why we recommend using the command steps to open and close the gates.
Hopefully, that helps explain things a bit, but if you need more clarification please let us know 
Right. That can’t be done right now, but I’m requesting that as a feature:
That the wait step get extended to have concurrency group attributes, and for one or more to act as a concurrency gate.
@kgillette sure thing! I’ll raise this as a feature request with our Product team.
1 Like
Hi! Is this or something equivalent something that is/has been considered (concurrency gating that doesn’t require an agent to initiate or conclude)?
@kgillette so there isn’t really a way to do this. It’s also why we recommend using command steps to open and close the gates.