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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[BLD] JS client release to GH packages + dev releases #2173

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[BLD] JS client release to GH packages + dev releases #2173

wants to merge 3 commits into from
+68 −5

Conversation

tazarov
Copy link
Contributor

@tazarov tazarov commented May 9, 2024

Description of changes

Summarize the changes made by this PR.

  • Improvements & Bug fixes
    • Added support for releasing js client to GH packages
    • Fixed the tag matching patterns to prevent unexpected tags to trigger the WF, thus resulting in failure (existing error handling is still in place)
    • Added support for dev releases to GH packages only (we want to prevent poluting npmjs with too many releases, as it is the primary distribution channel for the js package)
    • Implemented dev package naming convention to include sha of the merge commit + GH action run it for provenance tracing

Test plan

How are these changes tested?

Documentation Changes

N/A

@tazarov
feat: JS client release to GH packages
4857025 
- Added support for releasing js client to GH packages
- Fixed the tag matching patterns to prevent unexpected tags to trigger the WF, thus resulting in failure (existing error handling is still in place)
- Added support for dev releases to GH packages only (we want to prevent poluting npmjs with too many releases, as it is the primary distribution channel for the js package)
- Implemented dev package naming convention to include sha of the merge commit + GH action run it for provenance tracing
@vercel Vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented May 9, 2024 •
edited

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
chroma ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback May 23, 2024 3:59am

@tazarov Graphite App
Copy link
Contributor Author

tazarov commented May 9, 2024

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

Join @tazarov and the rest of your teammates on Graphite Graphite

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 9, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Please leverage this checklist to ensure your code review is thorough before approving

Testing, Bugs, Errors, Logs, Documentation

  • Can you think of any use case in which the code does not behave as intended? Have they been tested?
  • Can you think of any inputs or external events that could break the code? Is user input validated and safe? Have they been tested?
  • If appropriate, are there adequate property based tests?
  • If appropriate, are there adequate unit tests?
  • Should any logging, debugging, tracing information be added or removed?
  • Are error messages user-friendly?
  • Have all documentation changes needed been made?
  • Have all non-obvious changes been commented?

System Compatibility

  • Are there any potential impacts on other parts of the system or backward compatibility?
  • Does this change intersect with any items on our roadmap, and if so, is there a plan for fitting them together?

Quality

  • Is this code of a unexpectedly high quality (Readability, Modularity, Intuitiveness)

@tazarov tazarov requested a review from codetheweb May 14, 2024 14:44
@tazarov
Copy link
Contributor Author

tazarov commented May 21, 2024

@AlabasterAxe, @codetheweb, I'd love your input on this. It appears to be a useful way to let people test the very cutting-edge versions in main, as there isn't a straightforward way for users to install from main (notably when the package is a subdir).

AlabasterAxe
AlabasterAxe approved these changes May 21, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@AlabasterAxe AlabasterAxe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Makes sense to me!

.github/workflows/release-javascript-client.yml
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does it make sense to split this into two workflow files? one that runs on the release tags and the other that runs on pushes to main?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It does. It will make it more readable at the expense of an extra file, but I think we can all live with that. Let me split it.

@tazarov tazarov requested a review from AlabasterAxe May 23, 2024 03:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@codetheweb codetheweb Awaiting requested review from codetheweb

@AlabasterAxe AlabasterAxe Awaiting requested review from AlabasterAxe

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@tazarov @AlabasterAxe