-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 106
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
GCE Deploy #1627
GCE Deploy #1627
Conversation
Great idea to make this a squash merge. A couple of thoughts and questions before I wrap this up:
|
On the partitioned vs. monolithic CEMS issue, the So either I should disable the partitioned version of the data in the catalog for the moment, or we should generate both outputs. The |
Ok, I'll just run |
Changes:
|
Ok! The YAML formatting has been sorted out and the unit and CI tests have been re-enabled. I think this is good to merge in. |
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.
- Can you add a page to the documentation in the Development section that explains how the nightly builds and data deployment works in general and what the moving parts are so we can all have a shared understanding of it?
- It would also be good to get your bulletized summary of the code changes into the release notes.
- How are
local_pudl_etl.sh
andgcp_pudl_etl.sh
different? When do we use the local one? - In some places we're using the abbreviation
GCE
(GCE_INSTANCE
) elsewhere it'sGCP
(gcp_pudl_etl.sh
) and else-elsewhere it'sGCLOUD
(GCLOUD_BILLING_PROJECT
) and it's not always clear to me why it's one and not the other. I think it'll be easier to remember these names without looking them up if we make them as consistent as possible. Or maybe I just don't understand what's differentiating them? github.ref_name
/$GITHUB_REF
will be whatever the branch or tag are right? But the only case in which it runs on a branch is fordev
because of the on: push trigger.- We wanted to condense all these commits into a single squash-merge right? That still seems like a good idea to me.
Looks good to me. Weird that you apparently can't transfer ownership of a PR to someone else. Since I created the initial PR I can't "approve". |
Hmm weird. I'll squash and merge it in. |
Set up automated nightly builds on GCP.