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
Updating finding new dockerfiles and building them to test #499
Conversation
For future reference (if it takes me forever to come back to this), this is how github actions is getting variables from actions: https://hynek.me/til/set-output-deprecation-github-actions/ |
Also, https://github.com/ewels/MultiQC/blob/a8cbadef13bbc2201b54da072fd00be0c061f273/.github/workflows/multiqc_linux.yml has an awesome way to put a variable in the action name. This is helpful when looking for specific actions. |
Also, I want to test out run-name https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions |
Alright : this is now ready for review. This is phase 1/n of the facelift of StaPH-B/docker-builds. What this does :
What this PR does NOT do :
|
This is just an update to keep the versions in line. It simply builds the docker image to the 'test' stage.
The build-to-test changes seem to work great (https://github.com/StaPH-B/docker-builds/actions/runs/3622848226/jobs/6108036499) |
I've updated all the "manual deploy" steps, as well. There are still warnings, but they aren't something I can do something about unless we want to go with some other command than
|
Apologies for the delay in reviewing, I'll review this PR ASAP |
@@ -30,6 +30,8 @@ on: | |||
description: "Repository name. <repository>/tool:tag (Usually staphb)" | |||
default: "staphb" | |||
|
|||
run-name: Deploy ${{ github.event.inputs.tool }} version ${{ github.event.inputs.version }} |
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.
Love this addition, it makes the names of GH Action workflow much more descriptive than "Manual Deploy"
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 know! I saw it in multiqc's repo. I feel like it's going to make deploy better.
…es to using GitHub URL for downloading SPAdes binary. also adds ca-certificates to avoid cert errors
OK, so here's what testing I've done: First - I ran the workflow It failed due to the cab.spbu.ru server failling to properly serve up the files requested. SO I opted to edit the dockerfile on this PR to download from GitHub instead of the Russian server (9a7787a) and watch the GHActions cascade occur. Second - The workflows ( Third I ran the The deploy workflow ran as expected this time. The new checks for Lastly - I pushed a commit to update to docker/build-push-action@v3 for build-to-deploy.yml workflow (78d3abd) ^ After making this commit, I re-ran I'm good with merging this PR |
And lastly, regarding the |
Yay! |
I'll let you delete the dev branch if you're finished with it |
EDIT : NOW READY FOR REVIEW!!!
This is not a new docker container. There are some depreciation warnings to our github actions for new dockerfiles in PR. I need to test these, but this is what it may look like.