Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Unable to eat dogfood #312

Closed
korthout opened this issue Dec 26, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #339
Closed

Unable to eat dogfood #312

korthout opened this issue Dec 26, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #339

Comments

@korthout
Copy link
Owner

At the moment, this repo cannot eat its own dog food because backports will always run into conflicts.

This problem is caused by how GitHub Actions are supposed to be distributed: the artifacts are part of the repo. Each change to the source code leads to changes in the artifacts. These changes are generally committed as part of the pull request that introduces the changes. If multiple changes have been made on the main branch, the artifacts differ from that of previously released versions. Then, these commits cannot be cherry-picked automatically due to conflicts.

I see two potential solutions:

  1. don't build the new artifacts in the pull request, but build them automatically with a separate GitHub Action. Note that this action would have to be run on main and release branches to produce artifact changes automatically, commit and push these changes. Additionally, the action should not run on its own commit pushes. One upside to this is that authors no longer need to think about building the artifacts locally and provide them along with the rest of the pull request.
  2. split the source from the produced artifacts into separate repositories. This seems extreme because it makes it harder for users to find the source code. This does not have my preference.
@korthout
Copy link
Owner Author

There is a downside to option 1: To test pull requests with korthout/backport-action-test, the pull request's head needs to contain the newly build artifacts.

This is not a big downside, because I can always:

  • ask the author to do add the artifacts temporarily
  • create a temporary branch and build the artifacts there for use in testing
  • find a solution to this in backport-action-test (checking out the branch and building a new version in a workflow there)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant