feat: Create and push docker images to hub #198
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
![ellipsis-dev[bot]](https://github.com/avatars/in/64358?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me!
- Reviewed the entire pull request up to 3bb903d
- Looked at
76lines of code in4files - Took 50 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. agents-api/docker-compose.yml:10:
- Assessed confidence :
100% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
Please ensure that the Docker images are built and pushed to the Docker Hub before they are used in the docker-compose files. - Reasoning:
The PR author has added docker images to the docker-compose files. However, there is no information about where these images are built and pushed to the Docker Hub. It's important to ensure that the images are built and pushed correctly to the Docker Hub before they are used in the docker-compose files.
Workflow ID: wflow_thgGcaZnKES6upUD
Not what you expected? You can customize the content of the reviews using rules. Learn more here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me!
- Performed an incremental review on 3bb903d
- Looked at
75lines of code in4files - Took 1 minute and 15 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. agents-api/docker-compose.yml:10:
- Assessed confidence :
100% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
Ensure that the docker images are built and pushed in a CI/CD pipeline before they are used in the docker-compose files. - Reasoning:
The PR author has added docker images to the docker-compose files. However, there is no information about where these images are built and pushed. It's important to ensure that these images are built and pushed in a CI/CD pipeline before they are used in the docker-compose files.
Workflow ID: wflow_oidTEzyKgSt9goc8
Not what you expected? You can customize the content of the reviews using rules. Learn more here.
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested.
- Performed an incremental review on d0ef438
- Looked at
31lines of code in1files - Took 2 minutes and 29 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:25:
- Assessed confidence :
100% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
This action is set to cancel in-progress runs if they are not on the 'main' branch. Consider changing this to only cancel in-progress runs if they are on the same branch as the current run.
cancel-in-progress: true
- Reasoning:
The GitHub action is set to cancel in-progress runs if they are not on the 'main' branch. This could lead to unexpected behavior if multiple pushes are made to the 'dev' branch in quick succession. It would be more appropriate to only cancel in-progress runs if they are on the same branch as the current run.
Workflow ID: wflow_MrW1l7XTc7DqFFlK
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. We'll respond in a few minutes. Learn more here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me!
- Performed an incremental review on 4128299
- Looked at
24lines of code in1files - Took 2 minutes and 1 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:11:
- Assessed confidence :
90% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
This workflow is currently set to run on every push to the repository. Consider limiting it to run only on pushes to specific branches (like 'main' or 'dev') or when a new release is created to avoid unnecessary builds and pushes to Docker Hub. - Reasoning:
The workflow is triggered on every push to the repository. This might not be the intended behavior as it could lead to unnecessary builds and pushes to Docker Hub. It would be more efficient to trigger the workflow only on pushes to specific branches (like 'main' or 'dev') or when a new release is created.
Workflow ID: wflow_ol15wpx7BxzYO0Yb
Not what you expected? You can customize the content of the reviews using rules. Learn more here.
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested.
- Performed an incremental review on 1fd91a1
- Looked at
31lines of code in1files - Took 1 minute and 45 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:18:
- Assessed confidence :
100% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
Consider changing the trigger for this workflow to only run on push to the main branch or on release. This can help avoid unnecessary builds and pushes for work-in-progress branches. - Reasoning:
The Docker images are being built and pushed to Docker Hub on every push to the repository. This could lead to a lot of unnecessary builds and pushes, especially for work-in-progress branches. It would be more efficient to only build and push images when changes are merged into the main branch or when a new release is created.
Workflow ID: wflow_1oBRNMb4Top6K5nJ
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. We'll respond in a few minutes. Learn more here.
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested.
- Performed an incremental review on a3b8d03
- Looked at
15lines of code in1files - Took 2 minutes and 14 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:27:
- Assessed confidence :
100% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
Consider storing the Docker Hub username as a GitHub secret, similar to the Docker Hub password. This would make it easier to change the username in the future without having to modify the workflow file. You can reference the secret in the workflow file like this:
username: "${{ secrets.DOCKER_HUB_USERNAME }}"
- Reasoning:
The Docker Hub username is hardcoded in the workflow file. This could be a problem if the username needs to be changed in the future, as it would require a change to the workflow file. It would be better to store the username as a GitHub secret, similar to the Docker Hub password.
Workflow ID: wflow_pU6P5YobgUX32fsG
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. We'll respond in a few minutes. Learn more here.
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested.
- Performed an incremental review on b0e2dc6
- Looked at
34lines of code in1files - Took 1 minute and 30 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
0additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
Workflow ID: wflow_Bnaacrfi2du94ClJ
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. We'll respond in a few minutes. Learn more here.
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me!
- Performed an incremental review on df3a71a
- Looked at
111lines of code in4files - Took 2 minutes and 22 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
4additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. /agents-api/docker-compose.yml:11:
- Assessed confidence :
80% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
The change from loading two .env files (local and parent directory) to only loading the parent .env file could potentially cause issues if there were any environment variables that were previously being loaded from the local .env file that are not present in the parent .env file. Please ensure that all necessary environment variables are present in the parent .env file. - Reasoning:
The PR author has changed the way environment variables are loaded into the docker-compose services. Previously, two .env files were loaded, one from the local directory and one from the parent directory. The local .env file was optional, while the parent .env file was required. Now, only the parent .env file is loaded. This could potentially cause issues if there were any environment variables that were previously being loaded from the local .env file that are not present in the parent .env file.
2. /gateway/docker-compose.yml:11:
- Assessed confidence :
80% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
The change from loading two .env files (local and parent directory) to only loading the parent .env file could potentially cause issues if there were any environment variables that were previously being loaded from the local .env file that are not present in the parent .env file. Please ensure that all necessary environment variables are present in the parent .env file. - Reasoning:
The same change in environment variable loading is present in the docker-compose file for the gateway service. The same potential issue applies here.
3. /memory-store/docker-compose.yml:7:
- Assessed confidence :
80% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
The change from loading two .env files (local and parent directory) to only loading the parent .env file could potentially cause issues if there were any environment variables that were previously being loaded from the local .env file that are not present in the parent .env file. Please ensure that all necessary environment variables are present in the parent .env file. - Reasoning:
The same change in environment variable loading is present in the docker-compose file for the memory-store service. The same potential issue applies here.
4. /model-serving/docker-compose.yml:6:
- Assessed confidence :
80% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
The change from loading two .env files (local and parent directory) to only loading the parent .env file could potentially cause issues if there were any environment variables that were previously being loaded from the local .env file that are not present in the parent .env file. Please ensure that all necessary environment variables are present in the parent .env file. - Reasoning:
The same change in environment variable loading is present in the docker-compose file for the model-serving service. The same potential issue applies here.
Workflow ID: wflow_AJfHoFSxnfT2BahP
Not what you expected? You can customize the content of the reviews using rules. Learn more here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me!
- Performed an incremental review on c72584d
- Looked at
20lines of code in1files - Took 1 minute and 13 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. agents-api/docker-compose.yml:1:
- Assessed confidence :
50% - Comment:
The PR description mentions simplifying theenv_fileconfiguration, but I don't see any changes related toenv_filein this diff. Could you please clarify? - Reasoning:
The PR description mentions simplifying theenv_fileconfiguration indocker-compose.ymlfiles across several services. However, in the diff provided, there are no changes related toenv_file. This could be a mistake in the PR description or the diff might not be showing all the changes. I need to point this out.
Workflow ID: wflow_Cez4k9eVCE5yIL0h
Not what you expected? You can customize the content of the reviews using rules. Learn more here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me!
- Performed an incremental review on 414c5b0
- Looked at
34lines of code in1files - Took 2 minutes and 38 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
4additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:33:
- Assessed confidence :
50% - Comment:
Ensure that theDOCKER_HUB_PASSWORDsecret is properly set in the GitHub secrets for this repository. - Reasoning:
The Docker Hub password is being fetched from secrets, which is a good practice. However, it's important to ensure that this secret is properly set in the GitHub secrets for this repository.
2. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:36:
- Assessed confidence :
50% - Comment:
The 'touch .env' command is used before building and pushing the images. If the .env file is not used or already present, this command might be unnecessary. If it's necessary, consider adding a comment explaining why it's needed. - Reasoning:
The 'touch .env' command is used before building and pushing the images. This might be unnecessary if the .env file is not used or if it's already present in the directory. If it's necessary, it would be better to add a comment explaining why it's needed.
3. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:42:
- Assessed confidence :
50% - Comment:
The 'touch .env' command is used before building and pushing the images. If the .env file is not used or already present, this command might be unnecessary. If it's necessary, consider adding a comment explaining why it's needed. - Reasoning:
The 'touch .env' command is used before building and pushing the images. This might be unnecessary if the .env file is not used or if it's already present in the directory. If it's necessary, it would be better to add a comment explaining why it's needed.
4. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:11:
- Assessed confidence :
100% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
This workflow is currently set to run on every push event. Consider limiting it to specific branches or on pull request merges to avoid unnecessary builds and pushes. - Reasoning:
The workflow is triggered on every push event. This might not be the intended behavior as it could lead to unnecessary builds and pushes for work-in-progress branches. It would be more efficient to trigger the workflow only on certain branches or when a pull request is merged.
Workflow ID: wflow_BjmRcvMJJu06z8YC
Not what you expected? You can customize the content of the reviews using rules. Learn more here.
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer <diwank.singh@gmail.com>
creatorrr
force-pushed
the
f/docker-hub-images
branch
from
414c5b0
to
b889fd6
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested.
- Performed an incremental review on b889fd6
- Looked at
44lines of code in1files - Took 2 minutes and 17 seconds to review
More info
- Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of50%.
1. .github/workflows/push-to-hub.yml:4:
- Assessed confidence :
100% - Grade:
0% - Comment:
The 'on' trigger is set to trigger on every push to any branch, not just the 'dev' branch. This could lead to unintended builds and pushes when changes are made to other branches. Please adjust the 'on' trigger to only trigger on pushes to the 'dev' branch. - Reasoning:
The workflow is supposed to build and push images on every push to the 'dev' branch, but the 'on' trigger is set to trigger on every push to any branch. This could lead to unintended builds and pushes when changes are made to other branches.
Workflow ID: wflow_esX5FRJge1CgC8NB
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. We'll respond in a few minutes. Learn more here.
| Build-Push-Images-To-Docker-Hub: | ||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
|
|
||
| steps: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The matrix strategy is commented out and not used in the workflow. This means that the workflow will not be able to build and push images for multiple services as intended. Please uncomment and properly use the matrix strategy.
|
|
||
| - name: Build images | ||
| run: | | ||
| touch .env |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The 'touch .env' command is used twice in the workflow, once before building the images and once before pushing the images. This is unnecessary as the '.env' file only needs to be created once before building the images. Please remove the redundant 'touch .env' command.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Signed-off-by: Diwank Singh Tomer diwank.singh@gmail.com
Summary:
This PR introduces a new GitHub workflow that builds and pushes Docker images to Docker Hub under the 'julepai' namespace whenever there's a push to the 'dev' branch, using Docker Buildx and Docker Compose, and sets up concurrency to avoid conflicts.
Key points:
.github/workflows/push-to-hub.ymlagents-api,model-serving,gateway,memory-storeenv_fileconfiguration indocker-compose.ymlfiles of the servicesGenerated with ❤️ by ellipsis.dev