Europa docs: From local dev to CI environment#1693
Conversation
gerhard
changed the title
gerhard
force-pushed
the
europa-docs-local-dev-to-ci-environment
branch
from
6f56a89 to
f0a507c
Compare
|
✔️ Deploy Preview for devel-docs-dagger-io ready! 🔨 Explore the source changes: 6f56a892add0ad92609602d01d9d021b891f7066 🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/devel-docs-dagger-io/deploys/622677247aef60000719910d 😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-1693--devel-docs-dagger-io.netlify.app |
|
✔️ Deploy Preview for devel-docs-dagger-io ready! 🔨 Explore the source changes: c3f2195 🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/devel-docs-dagger-io/deploys/6227d6945af3d80007dbce5b 😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-1693--devel-docs-dagger-io.netlify.app |
gerhard
force-pushed
the
europa-docs-local-dev-to-ci-environment
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c368f01 to
b258a85
Compare
gerhard
force-pushed
the
europa-docs-local-dev-to-ci-environment
branch
6 times, most recently
from
e108059 to
1e009ad
Compare
The todoapp example contains a Netlify plan which uses the latest dagger additions: do & Client API. We are thinking of merging the examples repository into this one to make working with this easier. This is a step in that direction. We are not using the yarn package so that we can revert #1673 without breaking this implementation. The GitHub Action is WIP, we will continue with that tomorrow: dagger/dagger-for-github#24 Signed-off-by: Gerhard Lazu <[email protected]>
gerhard
force-pushed
the
europa-docs-local-dev-to-ci-environment
branch
from
1e009ad to
c3f2195
Compare
gerhard
changed the title
|
I am going to merge, as discussed with @shykes, and highlight a few things: I kept the I am forcing the log format to I am deleting the Netlify create site response body after the site is created. This was being deployed part of the static site before. cc @aluzzardi https://github.com/dagger/dagger/pull/1693/files#diff-cbd5029bcca3571bb8b40ca75abfa0b194b3fc22019d8f9bcbb4fe3c9265db2bR38-R40 |
Follow-up to #1693 Signed-off-by: Gerhard Lazu <[email protected]>
| push: | ||
| branches: | ||
| - main | ||
| paths: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know, me too, but this seemed reasonable:
I kept the paths filter in the workflow so that we don't use up GitHub Actions minutes unnecessarily: https://github.com/dagger/dagger/pull/1693/files#diff-472b1b8ec4b92806685394e7aad78734b8ca06feaa04491d31adfd51e5ebba95R7-R9
Even if Netlify does the right thing, we are still a private repository and pay for GitHub Actions build minutes...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- I just realized that this is about optimizing our own CI, not the highly visible example in the getting started guide. So I'm less sad now ;)
- How much visibility does Github Actions give us into minute spending? I would curious to measure the real cost without path filtering, and then compare it with path filtering. That would be very useful information, and might inform feature prioritization. Huge cost -> prioritize making our caching smarter. Small cost -> it can wait.
2 participants
The todoapp example contains a Netlify plan which uses the latest dagger additions: do & Client API #1668. We are thinking of merging the examples repository into this one to make working with this easier. This is a step in that direction.
We are not using the yarn package so that we can revert #1673 without breaking this implementation.
The GitHub Action is WIP, we will continue with that tomorrow: dagger/dagger-for-github#24
Part of #1327