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

ci: abstract go installation into shared composite action #6315

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mohammed90
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@mohammed90 mohammed90 added the CI/CD 🔩 Automated tests, releases label May 12, 2024
@mohammed90 mohammed90 force-pushed the ci-common-go-config branch 4 times, most recently from 09c713d to 21c2624 Compare May 12, 2024 17:51
@francislavoie
Copy link
Member

The reason we explicitly used ~ for the version was because at one point setup-go was serving us the cached Go version instead of the patched version that came out that same day so we wanted to bust through the cache by saying "give me at least this patch version".

I do like the idea of the jobs having "stable" and "oldstable" on them because then we don't need to continually update our "required jobs" config.

But the problem is the meaning of those can change out from under us when we're not ready to move ahead. Often we have some dependencies to update before we can use the next Go version (though this is much less of a problem now that quic-go & qtls is reworked).

Also I think sometimes golangci-lint sometimes doesn't support the latest Go so we need to pin to the previous one until they fix things.

So I dunno 🤷‍♂️

@mohammed90
Copy link
Member Author

The reason we explicitly used ~ for the version was because at one point setup-go was serving us the cached Go version instead of the patched version that came out that same day so we wanted to bust through the cache by saying "give me at least this patch version".

Faulty memory is bad 😅

My intent is to avoid having to update 3 or 4 files every time and forgetting one of the other in the process. That part works, but I think the outputs are stepping over each others toes 🤔 I'll shelf it for now. I wanted to get the PoC out for discussion at least.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI/CD 🔩 Automated tests, releases
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants