Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
feat: relay jenkins and gh events to gh - #272
Conversation
`github` has been renamed to `@octokit/rest`. The version sequence was kept, and the package name is the only breaking change on v14.0.0. Ref: https://github.com/octokit/rest.js/releases/tag/v14.0.0
Only breaking change on v15.0.1 is to `DELETE` calls, which we don't use. Ref: https://github.com/octokit/rest.js/releases/tag/v15.0.1
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
mmarchini
commented
Aug 9, 2020
Ah, one thing we need for GitHub events is to differentiate events coming from people with write access to the repo vs people without write access to it. We can append a |
phillipj
commented
Aug 9, 2020
That sounds convenient indeed! 👍 |
mmarchini
commented
Aug 10, 2020
Oh nice, the GitHub part of this PR was rendered unnecessary by GitHub earlier this week: https://github.blog/2020-08-03-github-actions-improvements-for-fork-and-pull-request-workflows/. With the new event announced in this blog post we can move everything we have here to Actions on nodejs/node, except for the Jenkins status updater, which will still need the relay. |
phillipj
commented
Aug 10, 2020
Hooray! Cool to see how that in practise made CI-start-on-label in nodejs/node (nodejs/node#34707) a lot simpler as well 💯 |
mmarchini
commented
Aug 11, 2020
I take it back, the new event is still not enough for some use cases (basically any use case that is not a check/linter/test), so we still want the relay |
mmarchini
commented
Aug 15, 2020
FYI I'll break this into two PRs: one for the Jenkins relay and one for the GitHub relay. Starting with the Jenkins relay which I think is more straightforward. This will allow us to experiment and tweak with it before adding GitHub as well. Also, if it works as expected we'll be able to remove a good chunk of code once we move Jenkins PR status to Actions :D |
phillipj
commented
Aug 17, 2020
Good idea! I'm a big fan of ship-small-and-tweak 👍 |
phillipj
commented
Nov 2, 2020
@mmarchini you okey with me picking up the jenkins relay work you mentioned if I find the time? Would be cool to contribute to the recent GitHub Actions efforts and move us in a direction we touched upon in the modernisation issue (#264). |
mmarchini
commented
Nov 2, 2020
I'm just back from vacation and was planning on picking this up again in a few weeks :) If you have time before that, feel free to pick it up. |
phillipj
commented
Nov 2, 2020
via email
Cool, welcome back from a well deserved break 😎 …On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 at 22:36, mary marchini ***@***.***> wrote:
I'm just back from vacation and was planning on picking this up again in a
few weeks :)
If you have time before that, feel free to pick it up.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#272 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJMWE2FXJWKAFZSH7IPORDSN4Q7BANCNFSM4PSZLWKQ>
.
|
phillipj
commented
Nov 29, 2020
Just opened #289 with one of the commits from this PR cherry picked & slimmed to only relay Jenkins events for now. |
Trott
commented
Aug 25, 2022
I'm going to close this as stagnant but by all means re-open if someone is going to be working on it. Thanks. |
Initial implementation of the "Actions relay" suggested here: #264. Doesn't work yet because createDispatchEvent is not available on the
githubversion we're using.(current PR rebased on top of #271 and #270, actual implementation here)