Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork2.8k
chore: improve CI by making it a workflow graph#4959
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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
nx-cloudbot commentedMay 11, 2022 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Thanks for the PR,@bradzacher! typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community. The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately. Thanks again! 🙏Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently onhttps://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint. As a thank you, your profile/company logo will be added to our main README which receives thousands of unique visitorsper day. |
netlifybot commentedMay 11, 2022 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
✅ Deploy Preview fortypescript-eslint ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to yourNetlify site settings. |
13709c5
to379ccf3
Comparecodecovbot commentedMay 11, 2022 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4959 +/- ##==========================================- Coverage 93.93% 91.70% -2.23%========================================== Files 175 361 +186 Lines 9904 12122 +2218 Branches 3139 3517 +378 ==========================================+ Hits 9303 11117 +1814- Misses 354 657 +303- Partials 247 348 +101
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown.Click here to find out more.
|
@armano2 - to collect and upload the coverage |
7628a21
toac8b43a
Compareac8b43a
toac2b486
CompareUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
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.
Looks great to me, thanks!
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- name: Use Node.js ${{ env.PRIMARY_NODE_VERSION }} | ||
uses: actions/setup-node@v3 | ||
- name: Checkout | ||
uses: actions/checkout@v3 |
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.
It looks like there's anactions/checkout@v3
before eachprepare-install
, and the only difference is thefetch-depth
sometimes being2
. Could theprepare-install
composite action do the checkout as well, withfetch-depth
as aninput
?
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.
I had this originally but becauseprepare-install
is a local reusable action - you have to do the checkout before GH action can reference the file :(
If we wanted - we could move the reusable actions to a separate repo entirely and then GH actions could reference them without a checkout - but I figured for now we can just eat the duplication and punt on that decision.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
armano2 left a comment• edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
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.
i do like this change and it seem that is working correctly, thank you for your work 🐱
i have one question about artifacts, do we have to clean them after coverage is uploaded?
I think there is storage limit on github, and we do not need them after they where submitted
https://github.com/actions/upload-artifact#retention-period Looks like by default it stores the artifact for 90 days! I changed this repos' default retention to 14 days considering that we don't ever look at old logs or artifacts. Worst case someone can re-run the workflow to get fresh artifacts. I'll also change the config here to 1 day retention for codecov artifacts (the minimum) to make sure we're not wasting space. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
While working on#4952 I split the linting job into multiple jobs.
I figured that we can do the same for all parts of our CI. With each step being its own job it means:
This PR actions the above to create a workflow for our CI:
a) Run the build and cache the output
b) In parallel we also any steps that don't need the build:
a) Prettier
b) Markdownlint
c) Spellcheck
a) ESLint
b) Typecheck
c) Integration tests
d) Website tests
e) Unit tests for all packages on different node versions (each package / version is run as a separate job)
I also:
Comparison:
Before:

After:
