Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Add ability to specify commit of avalanchego in ci #589
Add ability to specify commit of avalanchego in ci #589
Changes from all commits
0a5920e
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
😎 (why I can't do this as a reaction is beyond me)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should we drop
v
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think it's worth the change. Every time I make a change, I have to run CI three different times to make sure everything is working as expected (one for tagged version, one for branch, and one for commit). While I know that dropping a "verbose" option won't change any functionality, if I don't run those tests again, the screen shots and linked actions won't actually contain a commit in this branch.
Long winded way of saying, "if we want to make that change, it should happen in another PR".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I still think we shouldn't fetch or clone the entire repository to get a specific branch or commit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you mean by "fetch or clone the entire repository"? To my knowledge, you can't partially fetch a repository (unless you have git submodules or you're using LFS or something like that).
From the git docs:
Regardless,
fetch
will grab everything we need here, then we always checkout a detached-head by prefixing branch names withorigin/<branch_name>
or a commit directly.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, however it also fetches other branches that are not needed for this run.
I think this is fine for now, in the longer term I think we should use github actions to cache or create artifacts
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm at first I thought that the below code where it builds iff the build dir does not exist may run into issues for branches if there were newly pushed changes, but I see that this ensures that the build dir is based off of the commit, so that's not an issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm brilliant, what can I say, 😉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🤝
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These are the same thing, can we make them one variable
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I was a little worried about
AVALANCHE_VERSION
being used in other scripts though. My change makes this backwards compatible, so you can change the other scripts one at a time and make sure you don't break anything. I think that would be be better as a follow up PR so the context is a little more clear.So how about I do that immediately after this is merged?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sounds good to me