-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 717
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
Update awstest GitHub actions workflow #431
Conversation
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.
LGTM 👍
AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID: ${{secrets.AWSTEST_KEY_ID}} | ||
AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY: ${{secrets.AWSTEST_KEY_SECRET}} | ||
TOWER_ACCESS_TOKEN: ${{secrets.AWSTEST_TOWER_TOKEN}} | ||
AWS_JOB_DEFINITION: ${{secrets.AWS_JOB_DEFINITION}} | ||
AWS_JOB_QUEUE: ${{secrets.AWS_JOB_QUEUE}} | ||
AWS_S3_BUCKET: ${{secrets.AWS_S3_BUCKET}} |
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.
Any reason why some secrets start with AWS
and some AWSTEST
? 😅 It's also a fraction confusing that the env names don't match the secret names. But I guess that this is more of an upstream comment sorry, just noticed it here...
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.
My logic was to change the name of the first three secrets, as these are the ENV variables that a user could have set privately to the own tower token and AWS credentials. But I can see that this is confusing, to have some things with AWS
and some with AWSTEST
I'll fix it in the template before too many pipelines adopt it, sorry for the confusion!
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.
Ah ok, that makes sense 👍 Yeah I see your logic, but I wonder if we are less likely to mess this up if we just use AWS
instead of AWSTEST
for everything (also for others who want to run this in their own pipelines from the template, with their own GitHub Actions secrets).
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.
If it's not too much trouble to change anyway - if it's already a big hassle then it's fine to leave as it is.
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.
not, it's not, I'll fix it, it is a good point :)
Many thanks to contributing to nf-core/rnaseq!
To ensure that your build passes, please make sure your pull request is to the
dev
branch rather than tomaster
. Thank you!Please fill in the appropriate checklist below (delete whatever is not relevant). These are the most common things requested on pull requests (PRs).
PR checklist
dev
rather thanmaster
nextflow run . -profile test,docker
).nf-core lint .
).docs
is updatedCHANGELOG.md
is updatedREADME.md
is updatedLearn more about contributing: https://github.com/nf-core/rnaseq/tree/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md