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

Re-create ISO release on ISO update #225

Open
plata opened this issue Jan 14, 2024 · 7 comments
Open

Re-create ISO release on ISO update #225

plata opened this issue Jan 14, 2024 · 7 comments

Comments

@plata
Copy link
Contributor

plata commented Jan 14, 2024

Currently, the ISO release is created once. After that, only the artifacts are updated. This can be confusing because the release date and tag do not match the artifacts.

@xynydev
Copy link
Member

xynydev commented Jan 14, 2024

This choice was made because I assumed that a project might want to add a description to the release page, and that would get wiped when re-creating the release. Not sure which compromise would be better.

@plata
Copy link
Contributor Author

plata commented Jan 30, 2024

I see. Would it be possible to read the release description from e.g. the recipe?

@xynydev
Copy link
Member

xynydev commented Jan 30, 2024

I'm thinking of rewriting the ISO action as a reusable/composable action, so that'd be possible then. blue-build/github-action#3

@plata
Copy link
Contributor Author

plata commented Feb 1, 2024

Should this be in ublue or in the (to be created) startingpoint org?

@xynydev
Copy link
Member

xynydev commented Feb 1, 2024

Should this be in ublue or in the (to be created) startingpoint org?

This issue can stay here, the repo will be moved when the time comes. I linked a related issue in the (already created) BlueBuild org which will host the custom image tooling in the future.

@plata
Copy link
Contributor Author

plata commented Feb 1, 2024

Oh, I didn't realize that the new org is BlueBuild. Is it really a good idea to tie the name to ublue/Fedora?

@xynydev
Copy link
Member

xynydev commented Feb 1, 2024

Is it really a good idea to tie the name to ublue/Fedora?

It's tied in color only, and currently the only supported base images are still Ublue/Fedora. Know your history, etc. The name won the small vote we had with the people who initially joined to work on the project, and is now very much settled.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants