Skip to content
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

Copy GHA config for releasing to PyPI from s3 storage provider #23

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

DMRobertson
Copy link

matrix-org/synapse-s3-storage-provider#69 and matrix-org/synapse-s3-storage-provider#70 but for the generic template.

This will have the following effects:

  • modules created with the template will have a CI step checking they can be built into a distribution package
  • publishing a release will attempt to publish to PYPI. This requires the repository to have a PYPI_API_TOKEN secret set and will fail otherwise.

@DMRobertson DMRobertson requested a review from a team as a code owner January 10, 2022 13:25
Copy link
Contributor

@squahtx squahtx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want to update the release instructions in the templated README too?
We could do it as part of a different PR if you prefer.


- uses: "actions/setup-python@v2"
with:
python-version: "3.x"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does the Python version matter here? I suppose not.

runs-on: "ubuntu-latest"
steps:
- uses: "actions/checkout@v2"

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nitty nit: We've got difference whitespace styles here and in ci.yml. As a template I'd prefer it if we were consistent.

@DMRobertson
Copy link
Author

Thanks for taking a look Sean.

On reflection I'm wondering if it might make more sense to define a backend-meta repo and stick these workflows in there, so that we can use them via github's reusable workflows. (In a nutshell, I don't want us to have to edit N yaml files across N repos if we want to update our processes.)

@DMRobertson
Copy link
Author

Thanks for taking a look Sean.

On reflection I'm wondering if it might make more sense to define a backend-meta repo and stick these workflows in there, so that we can use them via github's reusable workflows. (In a nutshell, I don't want us to have to edit N yaml files across N repos if we want to update our processes.)

This is matrix-org/backend-meta#4.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants