make pip install warnet use prod
#421
Conversation
.github/workflows/deploy.yml
Outdated
| platforms: linux/amd64,linux/arm64 | ||
| context: src/warnet/templates/rpc | ||
| push: true | ||
| push: false |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the title of this commit missing the word "don't" ?
src/warnet/version.py
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
| VERSION = "0.9.11" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems like overkill to me to have the version string required in two places and compare them all the time. Is pyproject.toml always bundled with the rest of the code? Can't we just read the version directly from the toml file? We could add warcli version to the cli?
| kubectl apply -f {MANIFEST_PATH}/rbac-config.yaml | ||
| kubectl apply -f {MANIFEST_PATH}/warnet-rpc-service.yaml | ||
| kubectl apply -f {MANIFEST_PATH}/warnet-rpc-statefulset-dev.yaml | ||
| sed "s|bitcoindevproject/warnet-rpc:latest|bitcoindevproject/warnet-rpc:{VERSION}|" {MANIFEST_PATH}/warnet-rpc-statefulset.yaml | kubectl apply -f - |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
making me wonder again if python-embedded-bash (plus external yaml files) can be simplified with just... python.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
or maybe warnet-rpc-statefulset.yaml should just always have its own version hard-coded? I'm trying to think if we'd ever need latest in prod?
Don't even push these images, just test they build.
Also keep synced using a CI action
|
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. ConflictsReviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first. |
|
doesnt apply to helm model |
4 participants
When using
warcli deploywe will now use a production image from the current version, removing the requirement to mount the source directory into minikube, which is causing some issues for MacOS users.Developers should continue to therefore use the justfile for local dev.
Note, this does naturally make testing these CLI commands slightly harder for deverlopers, but I think we can manage :)