-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
Updating release-winget according to manifest schema changes #332
Updating release-winget according to manifest schema changes #332
Conversation
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.
Wow, they really broke backwards compatibility with these manifest changes. Do you have a link to the full spec? I wonder if there are some other fields we might want to populate (do Description
or LongDescription
exist?).
License: Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation | ||
Description: Secure, cross-platform Git credential storage with authentication to GitHub, Azure Repos, and other popular Git hosting services. | ||
ShortDescription: Secure, cross-platform Git credential storage with authentication to GitHub, Azure Repos, and other popular Git hosting services. |
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.
Is there now a longer Description:
that we should populate somehow?
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.
Description
does still exist. However, for reasons that aren't super clear, ShortDescription
is now required, while Description
is not. I'm happy to take a stab at adding a longer Description
though!
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.
Is there anything specific we'd want to call out in a longer Description
?
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.
I think we can wait on Description
until we know more about where it will show up.
Yep. I was pretty shocked tbh. Here's the link to the spec, and some documentation around it that I felt was helpful. I'm happy to add whichever extra fields we feel are helpful! |
Ah, there seems to be a |
with: | ||
token: ${{ secrets.WINGET_TOKEN }} | ||
repo: microsoft/winget-pkgs |
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.
I think we still want repo: microsoft/winget-pkgs
, right? Or, is that built-in to v1.2
?
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.
It's the default! However, we can keep if it's better to be explicit.
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.
Thanks! Using the default works for me.
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
Sorry, something went wrong.
It appears that changes have been made to the winget schema since this workflow was created, so I've made the necessary updates here. Additionally, we've fixed a couple issues in the
mjcheetham/update-winget
task that had been causing this workflow to fail (see this and this).With these updates, we should be good to go to publish gcm core to winget automatically with the next release. Exciting times!
I validated this workflow locally by successfully opening a PR against my winget-playground repo and running
winget validate
to ensure the generated manifest adheres to winget's required schema.