-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.7k
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
Another set of migrations from set-output to GITHUB_OUTPUT #35843
Conversation
Test Results SummaryCommit SHA: 574f047
To view the full API test report, click here. To view the full E2E test report, click here. To view all test reports, visit the WooCommerce Test Reports Dashboard. |
// If the release version is less than stable version we can bail. | ||
if ( version.localeCompare( stableVersion, undefined, { numeric: true, sensitivity: 'base' } ) == -1 ) { | ||
console.log( 'Release version is less than stable version. No automated action taken. A manual process is required.' ); | ||
core.setOutput( 'continue', 'false' ) |
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.
Just a heads up, you'll still see the deprecation warning when core.setOutput
is run because even as of latest it still does a set-output
command after doing the command to write to GITHUB_OUTPUT
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.
Seeing an error on
|
Whoops! sorry for the typo @roykho should be good now. |
Getting this error on this step "If community PR, assign a reviewer".
|
@roykho thats not related to this. Thats because that action uses a token set in our repo. Probably I missed this as a testing step but you could add a secret called Probably it doesn't matter though, the fact that this action is run in your fork is proof enough for me anyway |
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 fixing this last issue I found should take care of it.
Co-authored-by: Roy Ho <roykho77@gmail.com>
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.
LGTM!
49666da
to
89c6589
Compare
All Submissions:
Changes proposed in this Pull Request:
set-output
is deprecated and will be removed early next year. This includes another set of migrations fromset-output
such as in #35799Also note that saving these files ran Prettier against them too so where the formatting was incorrect that has also been fixed.
Note: I'm introducing these in chunks to make the test effort easier and to limit the risk of introducing wide ranging changes all at once.
How to test the changes in this Pull Request:
You will need a fork of WooCommerce with Actions enabled. See testing instructions in Remove some usages of set-output #35799 if you need help with this.
Merge this branch into trunk of your fork
Test the is-community script. Create an arbitrary PR into your fork under your account. This should not be marked as a community contribution, check the CI check worked correctly and there were no errors. To test the case for community contributors, ask a team mate to submit an arbitrary PR to your fork. It should be marked as community contribution as long as they don't have write access to your fork.
In your fork, check what the stable version of WooCommerce is (in the readme.txt). Create a release in releases that is a version less than stable. Check under actions you should be able to see a "post release" action has been run. It should have a skipped step because the version released is less than current stable. Now create a new release that is greater than the stable release version, this workflow should run all steps and none should be skipped. (for both cases obviously no errors should be shown).
For the cherry pick, I think its quite difficult to test. @jonathansadowski have you tested cherry pick in PRs before?
Other information:
pnpm --filter=<project> changelog add
?FOR PR REVIEWER ONLY: