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

Refactor GCS deploy helper workflow as a composite action #35

Closed
falquaddoomi opened this issue May 30, 2024 · 1 comment
Closed

Refactor GCS deploy helper workflow as a composite action #35

falquaddoomi opened this issue May 30, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@falquaddoomi
Copy link
Collaborator

I originally implemented #30 (issue #5) using a "helper" workflow to deploy GCP functions, .github/workflows/helper-deploy-func.yaml, that gets invoked via a workflow trigger by the workflows for specific functions.

Some time after, I stumbled across custom actions, specifically Composite Actions, which are IMHO a more elegant solution to reusing a bunch of steps with parameters than a "helper" workflow.

I've started refactoring the workflow as a composite action, and I thought I'd create an issue first to track the work.

@falquaddoomi falquaddoomi self-assigned this May 30, 2024
@falquaddoomi
Copy link
Collaborator Author

falquaddoomi commented May 30, 2024

Actually, now I'm not so sure; it seems there are multiple downsides to using composite actions, including:

  1. not being able to inherit secrets; they have to be passed as env vars
  2. all inputs being of type string
  3. not being able to choose a runner (the runner in a composite action is "composite"), which i assume also means no ability to parallelize in the workflow

I think I'm going to close this for now and perhaps reopen if we find a reason to switch from a reusable workflow to a composite action. The work so far was pushed to the branch issue-35-deploy-composite-action for future reference.

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

1 participant