-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
Option to enable corepack #651
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me, no bad changes from my branch 😎
This worked perfectly on my self-hosted runner 👍 Thanks! |
Co-authored-by: Steven <steven@ceriously.com>
Seems like there are merge conflicts so I will rebase. Hopefully this gets accepted soon. EDIT: wait, the code has changed significantly. The |
👍 this would be very helpful |
Would be amazing if that was merged :) |
Seems like I will need to rewrite this pr since the codebase has changed significantly. Since no maintainer is responding, I don't know if I should even rework my code. |
Maybe @DanRigby from the team can help us? |
works like a charm on my self-host, thanks ! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks great, thanks!
@styfle the PR has merge conflicts since setup-node had an update. Will you be able to merge the PR if I fix these issues? |
@SayakMukhopadhyay I don't have permission. But the merge conflicts will need to be fixed before anyone can merge. I also posted in #531 to get more feedback. |
@styfle I don't want to put the effort for rewriting the PR unless I get some confirmation from the maintainers that they intend to accept this. |
@SayakMukhopadhyay I may have some time this weekend to go through and rework your solution to match how the code has been restructured. Since you already have some good tests and a reasonable API, I plan on forking your branch and doing the work from there. I can submit a PR back to your branch if you'd like so we can leave this PR open. |
Thanks @brianespinosa , if in the end it turns out you have less time that planned, I would eventually like to help. Kind regards. |
@neolectron my concern here is that I have not heard from the initial author of this PR, so I am not sure forking the fork and submitting a PR back to the fork is the right path as that means we are waiting on action from the initial author, plus hoping the core maintainers actually decide to to anything with this (they have been silent so far). I suspect nothing will ever happen with this as I have seen multiple folks try to get a thumbs up or down from a maintainer and nothing... so I think I would be wasting my time. If you wanted to take a shot at this, I would fork this branch that has great testing from @SayakMukhopadhyay and use that testing to validate the refactor, then submit a new PR. Good luck! |
Ok thank you, I will make a new PR and take a shot at this. |
@brianespinosa @neolectron I would be happy for people to upgrade my PR to work with the latest codebase. Unfortunately I don't have the bandwidth right now to work on this. I might get some time on my hands in a couple of weeks and if nothing comes off till then, I will look into updating. |
New PR updated with main branch - #901 |
Is there a blocker for this PR? |
|
||
export async function enableCorepack(input: string): Promise<void> { | ||
let corepackArgs = ['enable']; | ||
if (input.length > 0 && input !== 'false') { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is enough to check if (input.length && input !== 'false')
@@ -604,3 +605,16 @@ export function parseNodeVersionFile(contents: string): string { | |||
function isLatestSyntax(versionSpec): boolean { | |||
return ['current', 'latest', 'node'].includes(versionSpec); | |||
} | |||
|
|||
export async function enableCorepack(input: string): Promise<void> { | |||
let corepackArgs = ['enable']; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is unnecessary to initialize this variable before the if
condition.
const packageManagers = input.split(' '); | ||
corepackArgs.push(...packageManagers); | ||
} | ||
await exec.getExecOutput('corepack', corepackArgs, { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
please, use getCommandOutput
or getCommandOutputNotEmpty
instead of directly calling exec.getExecOutput
@@ -49,6 +49,9 @@ export async function run() { | |||
auth.configAuthentication(registryUrl, alwaysAuth); | |||
} | |||
|
|||
const corepack = core.getInput('corepack') || 'false'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In order the input to be recognized it must be defined in action.yml
Hi @SayakMukhopadhyay, I've reviewed the PR but i am not ready to approve it, mainly because of it lacks e2e tests. Moreover, i added few changes requests which must be resolved prior to further actions. |
Description:
Adds the
corepack
option, which iftrue
will runcorepack enable
to enable corepack. This option is by defaultfalse
which ensures that there is no breaking change. Moreover, we can use a string of package manager names in place oftrue
which will indicate to runcorepack enable <string of package manager names>
.Related issue:
Closes #531
Check list: