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

🚚 Massive update: New features, Node 20, much less dependencies, bug fixes, more tests #384

Open
wants to merge 107 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mountainash
Copy link

@mountainash mountainash commented Apr 12, 2024

  • FEATURE ✨ Added --archive=tgz arg to Vercel deploy when using PREBUILT option to allow built deployments over 1500 files

  • Added defaults

  • Added GitHub Actions workflow to test the action

  • GITHUB_REPOSITORY is no longer a required input (it can be deduced using the GITHUB_TOKEN)

  • Allow Vercel domain aliases to be set on PRs

  • Using @actions/exec instead of spawn = require('child_process') for better OS portability

  • Fix: EditorConfig conflicted with Eslint rules

  • Using npx to run Vercel CLI to avoid version miss-matches (as seen in Error: undefinedVercel CLI 31.2.2 #374, Error: undefinedVercel CLI 31.0.1 #367, Error: undefinedVercel CLI 28.0.1 #226)

  • FEATURE ✨ Add a Workflow Summary to each run

  • Exporting VERCEL_PREVIEW_URL and VERCEL_DEPLOYMENT_UNIQUE_URL for use in other job steps

  • Using @actions/core to correctly get boolean and multilined inputs

  • Removed default "deploy" label from PRs

  • More emojis in logs 📝

  • Better accessibility formatting for comment table

  • remove references of [skip ci], it's deprecated

  • Replace _ in alias domains with - to match allowed domain names

  • FEATURE ✨ Transfer runtime secrets/envars from GHAction to Vercel Settings

  • See CHANGELOG for many 📦 dependencies updates (inc. Node 20) and bug fixes

👷‍♂️ Added Debug Action for in project testing
@mountainash
Copy link
Author

mountainash commented May 3, 2024

Closes #390 & #366 (Node v20 requests)

@BetaHuhn
Copy link
Owner

BetaHuhn commented May 5, 2024

Hey @mountainash, thanks for all this amazing work! Some these things are long overdue and I also really like the new features you added (especially the runtime env vars 💯).

I finally found some time to look through the open PRs and issues and merged the most pressing ones (like Node 20) but most likely won't have the time to properly maintain and develop this action beyond general maintenance.

This is quite a big PR with a lot of changes to not just the action but also the repo and its setup which makes it harder to review and incorporate. I'd be willing to accept these changes in some smaller chunks into this repository or as an alternative help transition this action and its maintenance to you and your repository and make the fork the "official" one instead.

Let me know how you want to move forward with this. Cheers! ✌️

@mountainash
Copy link
Author

I'd be willing to accept these changes in some smaller chunks into this repository or as an alternative help transition this action and its maintenance to you and your repository and make the fork the "official" one instead.

Thank you very much for your appreciation and I'm sorry I didn't break this up in to many PR's - but that comes with quite the "admin" overhead that I wasn't ready to make on what looked to be an abandoned project (I recently did many PR's on another project which were ignored and autoclosed shortly after - it's quite disheartening to see efforts wasted 😿).

If you don't have the time and are looking to offload this project, I'd gladly become the new care-taker for it - I even have a few more small bugs to fix and reliability features that will help make the project even more robust.

How would a transfer work? Aren't everyone's actions.yml files hardcoded to the repo on your GitHub user account name?

@BetaHuhn
Copy link
Owner

BetaHuhn commented May 5, 2024

sorry I didn't break this up in to many PR's - but that comes with quite the "admin" overhead that I wasn't ready to make on what looked to be an abandoned project (I recently did many PR's on another project which were ignored and autoclosed shortly after - it's quite disheartening to see efforts wasted 😿).

Totally understand! I have had similar experiences before 😅

If you don't have the time and are looking to offload this project, I'd gladly become the new care-taker for it - I even have a few more small bugs to fix and reliability features that will help make the project even more robust.

Nice! I had some ideas/feature roadmap a while back as well, have to dig up my notes sometime.

How would a transfer work? Aren't everyone's actions.yml files hardcoded to the repo on your GitHub user account name?

Yes, all current users reference the action directly via betahuhn/deploy-to-vercel-action which means a transfer of the repository would automatically change the source of the action which carries with it some security considerations.

Personally I think a change in ownership of a project like this should be communicated well and be done in a transparent way with a explicit action having to be taken by the user to change to the new owner.

The simplest approach I can think off is to create one last release that mentions the change of maintainers, add a big banner pointing to your fork so everyone can just switch over at their own choosing and deprecate the action (sadly not possible on GitHub right now) / archive the repository.

Less aggressive approach would be to just advertise your fork as a improved version and keep this one around.

@mountainash
Copy link
Author

mountainash commented May 5, 2024

All choices work for me... I made the changes for me and my use of your Action at @ginetta - but it's open-source and anyone is already free to use mountainash/fork-deploy-to-vercel-action@develop - but if you/we go the "offical" take-over path, maybe I should rename mine to just mountainash/deploy-to-vercel-action (removing "fork") to make the change over easier for users.

There's a chance some of the changes I've made to update the GitHub Actions core package could effect some projects depending on how they are built. I've only really heavily tested using the "PREBUILT" flow. I think it would be good to release my changes as v2.

I'd also have to release it onto the GitHub Actions Marketplace, but I think it could be confusing if there's two with the same name there, so how would you suggest to handle this?

TODO

@pm0u
Copy link

pm0u commented May 23, 2024

Is this still planning to be released in another repo? I really would like to see the --archive=tgz option exposed without prebuilt. Happy to contribute if development is moving elsewhere

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.

None yet

5 participants