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

CAT-1918 : Update module_release.yml #97

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 14, 2024
Merged

Conversation

malikparvez
Copy link
Member

Summary

Provide a detailed description of all the changes present in this pull request.

Additional Context

Add any additional context about the problem here.

  • Root cause and the steps to reproduce. (If applicable)
  • Thought process behind the implementation.

Related Issues (if any)

Mention any related issues or pull requests.

Checklist

  • 🟢 Spec tests.
  • 🟢 Acceptance tests.
  • Manually verified.

@malikparvez malikparvez requested a review from a team as a code owner June 14, 2024 07:46
@malikparvez malikparvez changed the title Update module_release.yml CAT-1918 : Update module_release.yml Jun 14, 2024
@gavindidrichsen gavindidrichsen merged commit 25a7fb2 into main Jun 14, 2024
2 checks passed
@gavindidrichsen gavindidrichsen deleted the malikparvez-patch-1 branch June 14, 2024 11:23
@h0tw1r3
Copy link
Contributor

h0tw1r3 commented Jul 10, 2024

@malikparvez @gavindidrichsen

Asking because there was no context at all in the commit or PR, what was the purpose of reverting all of these changes?

The reverted changes gave a much improved release change output, ability to retry a failed publishing to the forge, fixed tagging releases with annotated tags, and much more.

This breaks the ability to use this workflow to release puppet-toy-chest modules.

Most of the reverted changes were from the PR: #88

@malikparvez
Copy link
Member Author

Hey @h0tw1r3 sorry to revert your changes, considering the security module deployment is very critical activity so we decided to keep it very vanilla without much options. You can see refer #98

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants