Skip to content
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

feat: Add GH action to automatically update Transition Monitor Docker Build Status portion of README.md #4

Closed
jdhoffa opened this issue Mar 22, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
ADO feature a feature request or enhancement priority

Comments

@jdhoffa
Copy link
Member

jdhoffa commented Mar 22, 2024

The Transition Monitor Docker Build Status is currently just a static placeholder for info that should be automatically updated.

I would like to have a GitHub action that:

To be based heavily on https://github.com/RMI-PACTA/workflow.transition.monitor/blob/main/.github/workflows/build-and-push-Docker-image.yml

cc @AlexAxthelm

AB#10661

@AlexAxthelm
Copy link
Contributor

@jdhoffa Not self contained, but you may want to look at the invocation of the add-comment action in workflow.transtion.monitor. Right now, it's set to only run if it's on a PR event, but it wouldn't be difficult to have it trigger a push here on scheduled events (which are the ones that are building nightly).

https://github.com/RMI-PACTA/workflow.transition.monitor/actions/runs/8383423748

@jdhoffa jdhoffa added enhancement feature a feature request or enhancement and removed enhancement labels Mar 22, 2024
@jdhoffa
Copy link
Member Author

jdhoffa commented Apr 4, 2024

Strategy 1

  • In workflow.transition.monitor: duplicate the add-comment action (but maybe name it something like update-sit-rep) to run nightly (using all the latest on main packages)
  • Give that new action write access to this repo (pacta.sit.rep), and have it push a PR that updates the README directly?

Strategy 2

  • Add a workflow to pacta.sit.rep that attempts to run the whole build process again and update the README there

@AlexAxthelm just to understand, you would prefer Strategy 1?
I think I agree, but I've never tried to set an action up to open PRs in a totally separate repo, so will have to explore how to do that!

@jdhoffa
Copy link
Member Author

jdhoffa commented May 2, 2024

Superseded by #27

@jdhoffa jdhoffa closed this as completed May 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ADO feature a feature request or enhancement priority
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants