You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Static deployments on now come with some benefits, namely, that the instances are never put to sleep and dont count against your instances limit.
In my personal uses of stage-ci, I mostly just want static assets hosted. I don't have a custom webserver I need stood up. I'm thinking we could make this easier to pull off when using stage-ci.
Proposal:
If your package.json has an npm script named stage-build_static, stage-ci will run it and expect that it creates a new folder named _static which contains an index.html and all the assets. stage-ci will then have now deploy that _static folder.
Obviously we're relying on two naming conventions here, but since now-start and now-build are a thing, it seems reasonable. I'm totally open to names being different, or another approach entirely. Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Static deployments on
now
come with some benefits, namely, that the instances are never put to sleep and dont count against your instances limit.In my personal uses of stage-ci, I mostly just want static assets hosted. I don't have a custom webserver I need stood up. I'm thinking we could make this easier to pull off when using stage-ci.
Proposal:
If your package.json has an npm script named
stage-build_static
,stage-ci
will run it and expect that it creates a new folder named_static
which contains an index.html and all the assets.stage-ci
will then havenow
deploy that_static
folder.Obviously we're relying on two naming conventions here, but since
now-start
andnow-build
are a thing, it seems reasonable. I'm totally open to names being different, or another approach entirely. Thoughts?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: