Use subdirectories to name actions, e.g. zulip/github-actions-zulip/send-message

[andersk]

I assume the intent of naming this repository github-actions-zulip is that we can put multiple actions here, but right now the send message action is referenced by just zulip/github-actions-zulip. We should rename it to zulip/github-actions-zulip/send-message, using the subdirectory syntax.

[ggrossetie]

I didn't know about the subdirectory syntax, neat 👌🏻
We should probably remove the extra zulip no?

zulip/github-actions/send-message

[andersk]

Having -zulip in the repository name is nicer for people who want to fork it.

[timabbott]

Yeah, I agree with keeping -zulip in the name; it's really important for a repository that we expect to be forked to have its basename be globally unique.

[ggrossetie]

OK let's keep the -zulip suffix, I will move the send message action under a subdirectory named send-message 👍🏻

[ggrossetie]

However, I cannot find any "popular" GitHub Action using this pattern. So I wonder if it's a good idea.

• AWS is using a dedicated org: https://github.com/aws-actions
• Google Cloud is using a dedicated org: https://github.com/google-github-actions
• Azure has quite a few actions: https://github.com/marketplace?type=actions&query=Azure (they are not even using a specific naming convention, all GitHub Actions are in the Azure org)

Interestingly, Google Cloud has moved away from the sub-directory approach: https://github.com/google-github-actions/setup-gcloud/tree/master/upload-cloud-storage

Slack has only one action to send messages: https://github.com/slackapi/slack-github-action.
Not the official one but Discord has also only one action to send messages: https://github.com/Ilshidur/action-discord

[ggrossetie]

We should probably stick with the "one repository per GitHub Action" strategy.
I wonder if we should rename this repository: github-actions-send-message-zulip?

[andersk]

We shouldn’t just copy what other organizations do without a reason. We have a reason for wanting a single repository: fewer repositories to maintain.

GitHub’s own codeql-action is an example of a repository with multiple actions as subdirectories.

[timabbott]

Yeah, and I think there are other actions (like a Resolve Topic integration) that could be pretty interesting to add.

[ggrossetie]

GitHub’s own codeql-action is an example of a repository with multiple actions as subdirectories.

This is a great example 👍🏻
Interestingly, they are using a single src/lib directory at the root of the repository and each action (subdirectory) contains only a definition file (which references the src/lib directory):

• https://github.com/github/codeql-action/blob/main/analyze/action.yml
• https://github.com/github/codeql-action/tree/main/init/action.yml
• https://github.com/github/codeql-action/blob/main/autobuild/action.yml

I think it makes sense in our case since we will probably want to share some logic to interact with the Zulip API.

We shouldn’t just copy what other organizations do without a reason. We have a reason for wanting a single repository: fewer repositories to maintain.

Using experience from others is a valid reason. Every solution has benefits and drawbacks.
For instance, one drawback is that we won't be able to release actions individually. We could argue that this is actually a good thing but only experience will tell (and this is where experience from others is important).

I was a bit unsure since I wasn't able to find a single repository where this approach was taken.
But now I can clearly see the benefits in our context and how we will be able to manage the build/release workflow.

Let's proceed 😉