Have the action output a versioning element so it could be used as part of the cache restore key #239
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
By providing an output with the action version we ease cache invalidation on consumer, due to the fact we can now stop worrying about changes to the action's cache itself Might also be interesting for self-hosted runners...
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description
We implement auto-versioning (from the main branch) as a way to have an action output variable which is the commit unique id of the action version being executed, and also document this.
Since this implies a change to the main branch, directly, and there's no easier way to do it, we'd have to change
(which I already did, so needs to be reverted if we don't wanna move forward 😄)
These (changes to the settings) do not represent explicit security issues, only potential maintenance issues, in which we'd merge something that didn't pass CI. In any case, I'm "pretty sure" that before releasing, and especially at pr time, we validate the workflow results and ask pr'ers to act on those, so it shouldn't be a big deal. Lemme know...
Otherwise, if you have other ideas (I'd hate to have to approve a pull request for this everytime we merge to the main branch or, even worse, have to maintain the version by hand), I'm all ears...
Closes #222.
Other considerations
There's a bit of linting and clean up involved, also.
And finally, I tested the changes and the flow in my own action branch, so it should be working as-is.