Add GitHub Actions support #42
Conversation
|
Fixes #31 |
|
Awesome!!! @watson any chance we could get this merged in? |
| { | ||
| "name": "GitHub Actions", | ||
| "constant": "GITHUB_ACTIONS", | ||
| "env": "GITHUB_ACTIONS", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe this should be singular GITHUB_ACTION
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, GITHUB_ACTION is set to the name of the action that’s running (if there is one). For example, action/setup-node@v1.
GITHUB_ACTIONS is set always. I’ll put in a PR to the docs to reflect this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not seeing the GITHUB_ACTIONS (plural) referenced anywhere. Can you share a link to that documentation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry about the delay, we don't have the documentation update live yet.
|
👍
…On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 2:43 PM Edward Thomson ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In vendors.json
<#42 (comment)>:
> @@ -73,6 +73,12 @@
"constant": "DSARI",
"env": "DSARI"
},
+ {
+ "name": "GitHub Actions",
+ "constant": "GITHUB_ACTIONS",
+ "env": "GITHUB_ACTIONS",
No, GITHUB_ACTION is set to the name of the action that’s running (if
there is one). For example, ***@***.***
GITHUB_ACTIONS is set always. I’ll put in a PR to the docs to reflect
this.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#42?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAMWZ6SWNQLUHP5IBSUYMZ3QJZ63PA5CNFSM4IWCUK2KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFWFIHK3DMKJSXC5LFON2FEZLWNFSXPKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOCEYEMCY#discussion_r324475783>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMWZ6TS3D7UTANPW4C3KW3QJZ63PANCNFSM4IWCUK2A>
.
|
|
@watson Is this missing anything else or can it be merged? |
| t.equal(ci.GITHUB_ACTIONS, true) | ||
| assertVendorConstants('GITHUB_ACTIONS', ci, t) | ||
|
|
||
| delete process.env.GITHUB_ACTIONS |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You might want to perform this global teardown in a finally block in case any of the previous steps throw.
|
Now that GitHub Actions is generally available (https://github.blog/changelog/2019-11-11-github-actions-is-generally-available/) can we get this merged with a new release @watson??? |
|
@watson give us some love 💘 |
|
FYI I emailed the maintainer directly over two weeks ago. Haven't heard a peep. I'm not sure how to proceed from there. |
|
I published a fork with this merged in case anyone needs this in the meantime. @qawolf/ci-info |
|
@sibiraj-s Do you still have merge access? I see you merged the last commit in the repo. We're trying to get some motion on this PR. |
|
Cool, thanks @sibiraj-s! Now how can we get a release shipped? |
|
@sibiraj-s Thank you. You're a star.
Related: Have you seen #44? |
|
I don't have publish access, I have notified reg this to @watson. meanwhile i will look into other Issues/PR and get them ready so it can be published whenever possible. For now (till the new changes are published) |
Unless you know @watson personally, that may be a dead end. This issue was code complete since 9/19. I reached out to him via email 3 months ago and twitter 1.5 months ago about this exact issue. He didn't reply to either. I honestly considered the fact that he might be dead until he retweeted his company a few days ago. I suspect he has simply lost interest in the project. I would love to see him hand the reins over to someone else, but alas here we are. |
I don't think it's nice to say something like that. Open source projects are provided without warranties and any maintainer can step down at any time they want. It's much kinder to assume the priorities of how the maintainer spends their free time has changed.
Speaking from a perspective of a maintainer myself, that's way easier said than done, especially for a project that has this many weekly downloads and dependents. We can't hand over a project to just anyone because we can't be sure that they don't have malicious intent with future releases, or that the new maintainer's own security & release practices match ours. |
|
@mislav I completely agree that it’s very extreme and not nice to assume the worst when people are no longer active. That being said. GitHub provides a very simple archive feature that @watson COULD use to indicate the project is no longer being maintained. Or a simple edit to the README as well. It’s totally fair that priorities change, but maintainers should at least respect the community enough to spend 1 minute informing the community of the priority change. |
@mislav Thinking someone is dead is neutral. Death is merely a state of being. I didn't wish death upon him. I said it may be the case. Humans have a tendency to die... at a rate of 100% as observed thus far.
You are 100% correct. However even the busiest man in the world has the time to say "I don't want to support this anymore", "leave me alone", "die in a fire", or any kind of response at all honestly. I assumed the radio silence to Github, email, and Twitter meant something more sinister was at play. Since I'm unable to imagine someone that can't find under 30 seconds to type a handful words, it seemed like a much nicer assumption than to assume he was merely ignoring us all intentionally. I'm an optimist so I was assuming the best of the maintainer and that this silence was beyond his control. |
|
I'm running GitHub Actions and want to use However, it seems that this PR has not been published to NPM yet. Could we publish the latest code to npm for convenience? |
|
Published v3. |
Add support for detecting a run inside a GitHub Actions environment. This detects using the
GITHUB_ACTIONSenvironment variable, and detects a pull request run by examining theGITHUB_EVENT_NAMEenvironment variable, which indicates why a GitHub Actions run was started. When it is set topull_request, we setisPRto true.