-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 752
Touch-ups to master #2084
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
Touch-ups to master #2084
Conversation
|
Questions for you, @neuecc:
I can dramatically simplify your release workflows. You have a ton of code to update package.json and yet nbgv can do it automatically for you. |
|
I'm hesitant to rewrite your release workflows, though I think they could be dramatically simpler, because I gather you're reusing these workflows across repos at your company/team, and you may not like having one repo that does things differently. But I recommend you apply some changes:
|
I think your suggestion is good, so I'd like to consider it. Could you write about the release flow using NB.GV in CONTRIBUTING.md? |
|
Regarding nuget package build, if you see no value in pushing CI packages to a feed, that's fine. But I strongly encourage building those packages on every build anyway, even if they aren't pushed anywhere, because package build authoring is tricky and can easily break the build if PR builds don't validate them. I'll make the changes you suggest and enable package build (but not push) on PR/CI. |
|
The release flow using NB.GV doesn't much apply, in fact NB.GV itself doesn't much apply, with your workflows written the way they are, which overrides the version information at the time you queue the release build. So if you'd like to consider how I do releases on Github Actions with NB.GV, I think that should be a separate PR. |
neuecc
left a comment
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.
Thank you, this seems fine for now so I'll merge it.
While I'd like to actively consider proper utilization of NB.GV, there's also a possibility that we might completely remove it.
I'll continue to comprehensively evaluate package uploading options, including hosting on Azure.
By the way, if I may say one thing here - I've noticed that recently there seems to be an overt tendency to push people toward Nerdbank.MessagePack.
I think it would be better to refrain from repeatedly promoting it in other repositories, as that kind of behavior could be seen as trolling.
Ya, I suspected that might be the direction you're going, which is why I haven't spent time bringing it back to the release pipeline yet. Let me know if you want help bringing it back, but I'm content to let you drive either direction.
Thanks for letting me know how you feel about it. I'll refrain from it. |
I plan to add to this PR to re-activate NB.GV as the determiner of version numbers.