Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Update Go & JS tests to conform to the multidim interop test spec. #121
Update Go & JS tests to conform to the multidim interop test spec. #121
Changes from 8 commits
d23f238
f180bfb
90c6f72
0dc6bea
76717cf
59b5d90
482e8ac
406df30
6d1aed2
4c2d3dc
e9cd3e6
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
rust-libp2p executes this step on each pull request. Some pull requests originate from forks. Those pull requests don't have access to the above secrets. Thus this step fails.
See https://github.com/libp2p/rust-libp2p/actions/runs/4142906998/jobs/7164133938 on libp2p/rust-libp2p#3344 as an example.
I don't yet have the full picture on the caching approach via an S3 bucket. Would mounting the bucket as read-only from forks be an option? Worst case, we don't mount the bucket on forks at all, thus building all images from scratch.
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.
The original plan was that the
if
should have skipped this step. I'll check why that isn't happening.Unfortunately no. The s3 cache needs rw access. Maybe there's a hidden option I'm not seeing, but when I tried a read only key it failed.
My original plan was to have forks build from scratch.
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.
I had the
if
statement wrong. #131 fixes it.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.
Did you try omitting the
--cache-to
option when you tried with a read-only key?According to https://docs.docker.com/build/cache/backends/, those two options operate separately and I am surprised that
--cache-from
by itself would need write permissions.If we conditionally define
--cache-to
, we should be set our bucket to be publicly readable and have forks use our cache.Alternatively, I see that this also has a registry cache option which might be interesting to explore.
I really want our CI to always be fast, not just for our own PRs. (I also don't like wasting compute power.)
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.
Happy to help with this but it would earliest be in ~5 days as I am off the grid for the next few.
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.
I hadn't, that's probably it!
Probably worth figuring out how to make this bucket public and then defaulting to that public bucket if no keys are passed. I'll open an issue.
This file was deleted.