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

[IO-1402][internal] Refactoring deployment #17

Merged
merged 24 commits into from
Jul 26, 2023
Merged

[IO-1402][internal] Refactoring deployment #17

merged 24 commits into from
Jul 26, 2023

Conversation

owencjones
Copy link
Contributor

Deployment is blocked by deprecation of a hook, which has necessitated this refactor.

If this change is successful, then:

  • Tests will run on PR
  • CodeQL no longer runs, as it isn't really supporting anything any longer
  • Building artefacts will run on creation of a semver tag
  • Deployment of the artefacts to Pypi.org is triggered by creation of a release

Building of artefacts is tested and seems to work, so does SDist. Trouble encountered testing on-release actions without being on release.

NB: There is currently a block in the code to prevent deployment to Pypi (the URL is deliberately wrong) - to allow diagnosis of the pipeline without chance that it will deploy. upolygon is a dependency of many things, so a real deployment has potential to break things!

verbose: true

- name: "TEST: Release code as new release on Test Pypi"
if: ${{ env.IS_TEST_RELEASE == 'true' }}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it possible to adopt a similar approach for darwin-py so we can test deployments?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well, it doesn't yet work here, but yeah, it actually won't be too much work once it works here - I had the same thought, because I put the pipeline ticket on the board ages ago now but can't get it into sprint.

Copy link
Contributor

@Nathanjp91 Nathanjp91 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Don't see any problems with it, hope this new system works because it looks much simpler.

@owencjones owencjones merged commit 4e82749 into master Jul 26, 2023
7 of 9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants