Separate VSCode publish jobs #3106
Conversation
- Split publish-to-open-vsx and publish-to-vs-marketplace into separate jobs - Ensure the same VSIX file is published to both registries - Build and Open VSX publish happen together, VS Marketplace publishes sequentially - Remove skipDuplicate since jobs can now be rerun independently
| with: | ||
| name: vscode-extension | ||
| path: ${{ steps.publishToOpenVSX.outputs.vsixPath }} | ||
| retention-days: 1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need overwrite: true? Advise I think it will fail if we do to deployments in the same day.
| name: Push cursorless-talon subrepo | ||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
| needs: publish-extension | ||
| needs: [publish-to-vs-marketplace, publish-neovim-extension] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My gut feeling is that if we successfully update the vscode marketplace we should also update the Talon repository regardless of neovim status. Historically the neovim publishing have been a bit flaky.
|
I wouldn't say I'm against go in this direction. At the same time is it really that problematic to rebuild the binary in case the vscode market plays publishing doesn't work? We're already rebuilding the binary between testing and publishing. I think the best solution would be to build the binary once and then reuse it for testing and publishing, and if we're not going to do that the current set up is fine. How do you feel? |
|
If we're going this direction I think I'd opt for 3 steps: build, publish openvsix, and publish vscode. The latter two can run in parallel and both depend on build. Ideally one marketplace being down shouldn't block the other, and we should be able to rerun either. |
Implements the suggestion from #3104 to separate the publish jobs.
Amp-Thread-ID: https://ampcode.com/threads/T-c5112243-7633-492f-911d-5c3e5998c847