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

Publish is not running on a push? #75

Closed
annagrin opened this issue Feb 24, 2023 · 8 comments
Closed

Publish is not running on a push? #75

annagrin opened this issue Feb 24, 2023 · 8 comments

Comments

@annagrin
Copy link

annagrin commented Feb 24, 2023

We have automated publishing in webdev repo, thanks @kevmoo for adding the configuration, this is awesome!

A couple of issues the I encountered when I used it (I think it is for the first time) in dart-lang/webdev#1993

  • Even if the configuration is meant to run using main SDK channel, it still run using stable and failed due the lower SDK constraint we have in dwds.

  • I changed the configuration to run publish using dev channel, but the publish task disappeared.

First push:

image

Second push:

image

@kevmoo
Copy link
Member

kevmoo commented Feb 24, 2023

@devoncarew ?

@devoncarew
Copy link
Member

I added a comment here: https://github.com/dart-lang/webdev/pull/1993/files#r1117819441, which may help address this.

@annagrin
Copy link
Author

annagrin commented Feb 25, 2023

@devoncarew I misunderstood the meaning of @main here, thanks for the correction!

I tried switching to dev SDK channel correctly this time, but the validation still fails:

  Validating package...
  Package validation found the following potential issue:
  * Packages with an SDK constraint on a pre-release of the Dart SDK should themselves be published as a pre-release version. If this package needs Dart version 3.0.0-188.0.dev, consider publishing the package as a pre-release instead.
    See https://dart.dev/tools/pub/publishing#publishing-prereleases For more information on pre-releases.
  
  Package has 1 warning.

Should we be failing on this warning for the lower bound SDK constraint on the package? This release is in preparation for dart 3.0 and needs to be a stable release to be rolled into flutter, which still has a pre-3.0 dart, but we don't want it to be accidentally updated for users before they switch to the right SDK.

@devoncarew
Copy link
Member

devoncarew commented Feb 25, 2023

Ok, so from my understanding:

  • you've updated the publishing task to run from a dev sdk
  • you're seeing this warning from the publish; that's failing the validation task
  • this is a warning you'd see from the command line if you manually ran dart pub publish --dry-run using a dev sdk

Is that all correct? If so, it sounds like this is a warning that you knowingly want to ignore, but that our CI is failing on. Short term, you should be able to ignore the failure and merge the PR w/ that one red bot. The publishing task (when you tag master w/ the right tag - I assume something like dwds-v18.0.0) should still succeed. It'll run the publish with dart pub publish --force, and I think will ignore the warning.

Longer term, we should have a way to configure that this warning is acceptable to us. That could be a flag in the publish config file - disregard-warnings. Or perhaps, when a publish bot fails, a repo maintainer could add a label - publishing-ignore-warnings to indicate that the warnings are not blockers.

@annagrin
Copy link
Author

@devoncarew this is correct. I am disabling the publishing verification for now in favor of manual one until we have support for disabling some warnings.

@devoncarew
Copy link
Member

OK, sounds good (though FYI, you should be able to land the PR even with the red bot - the validation failure - and then still use the publishing automation via tagging the commit in master). Publishing manually would also work.

@annagrin
Copy link
Author

Thanks! I prefer the bot to be green though, we will re-enable the check as soon as it can work for us, as it indeed a very useful feature.

@devoncarew
Copy link
Member

devoncarew commented Mar 4, 2023

I'm going to close this; we also have #64, which is similar.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants