-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 806
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
Update github actions to the latest versions #1026
Conversation
Tests passed ✓, Code: |, Stack: |, Structs: |
|
Thanks for this, looks like @geky-bot is still having a bit of issue since we were relying on the original artifact merging behavior. Will poke around and see if there's a fix. |
Looks like there's a merge-on-download option: https://github.com/actions/upload-artifact/blob/main/docs/MIGRATION.md#multiple-uploads-to-the-same-named-artifact Will experiment, I have another fork of the repo for this. There's a few delicate steps (release scripts) that rely on artifacts. |
41a5106
to
355ede0
Compare
Pushed up a couple changes to fix things, tested here: geky/littlefs-test-repo#10 Also tweaked a couple things while editing/testing this:
Let me know if this looks good to you, and I can go ahead and merge this into the devel branch to unblock other PRs. |
Tests passed ✓, Code: 17064 B (+0.0%), Stack: 1440 B (+0.0%), Structs: 812 B (+0.0%)
|
Turns out major versions break things. Old behavior: Artifacts with same name are merged New behavior: Artifacts with same name error Using a pattern and merging on download should fix this at least on the job-side. Though I do wonder if we'll start running into artifact limit issues with the new way artifacts are handled...
Looks like cross-workflow downloads has finally been added to the standard download-artifact action, so we might as well switch to it to reduce dependencies. dawidd6's version was also missing the merge-multiple feature which is necessary to work around breaking changes in download-artifact's v4 bump. Weirdly it needs GITHUB_TOKEN for some reason? Not sure why this couldn't be implicit.
With GitHub forcibly deprecating old versions of actions, pinning the minor/patch version is more likely to cause breakage than not.
355ede0
to
798073c
Compare
Tests passed ✓, Code: 17064 B (+0.0%), Stack: 1440 B (+0.0%), Structs: 812 B (+0.0%)
|
oops, i was not aware of the merging behavior. |
To be fair it is pretty unintuitive behavior, but it was useful. I wonder if we'll see more issues with hitting the artifact limit with GitHub's changes. |
Merging |
No description provided.