That was the whole point of the previous change.
Also, run the build number creation on a pull request as well (at least for a
while) so we don't need to create new releases in order to test that part of
the process).
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
In order to make it easier to see what's happening inside get-atomic-buildnr.sh
write the result to a file that can be read by the caller. Not quite as
elegant, but hopefully more practical to see what's going wrong when no new
build number is created.
Make sure that post-releasenotes is successfull by actually posting a release
artifact (apparently the gh release action otherwise quietly fails).
Try to ensure we find the Android APK when uploading to the release.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Some experimentation showed what should have been obvious. The release
information is additive. So it's enough if ONE of the actions creates release
notes, all the others can simply add additional release artifacts.
To make this more obvious, this commit creates a new action that does nothing
but create the release notes and publish the release. Since it really doesn't
do anything else, it's likely to be the quickest to complete, but that doesn't
matter - the last action that has a body or body_path in the gh-release action
determines the release notes. And we now have exactly one action that does so.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Instead of using a thirdparty action and painfully passing things around,
simply use the GitHub CLI (gh) and assemble the release notes on the fly.
This makes for much simpler and much easier to maintain code.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Move both code and the release note text into files that can be shared between
multiple actions.
This should make the actions smaller and easier to read and since this is used
in several actions it should make things much easier to maintain.
In order to test this without too much unnecessary noise, this commit only
changes the android workflow - the others will be changed in a later commit
once his has been tested and works (again, this can really only be tested by
merging the PR into master).
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Move around the scripts required for the setup of the build environment
for android to satisfy docker's requirement of locality.
This allows the removal of an extra copy step, and avoids the creation
of extra artefacts, while still providing the same functionality.
Signed-off-by: Michael Keller <github@ike.ch>
- for now all versions start with v6.0
- CICD builds use the monolithic build number as patch level, e.g. v6.0.12345
- local builds use the following algorithm
- find the newest commit with a CICD build number that is included in the
working tree
- count the number of commits in the working tree since that commit
- if there are no commits since the last CICD build, the local build version
will be v6.0.12345-local
- if there are N commits since the last CICD build, it will be
v6.0.12345-N-local
- test builds in the CICD that don't create artifacts simply use a dummy release
in order to not incorrectly increment the build number and also not to waste
time and resources by manually checking out the nightly-build repo for each of
these builds.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
They are now the four digit version dash build nr
So major.minor.patch.commitsSinceTag-buildNr
This makes it easier to correlate the release name and a specific manually
built version.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Documentation about all this on GitHub is a bit confusing.
I'm not entirely sure that this is the way to go. But I can't try
until this gets merged into master.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Change the name of the `GITHUB_WORKSPACE` environment variable in the
android build script to `OUTPUT_DIR`, which is more intuitive when the
script is used for local builds.
Also test if the variable is defined before attempting to use it as the
target of the build output.
Signed-off-by: Michael Keller <github@ike.ch>
Prevent attempts to generate a build number for pull request builds as
they will fail due to the lack of permissions on the
`subsurface/nightly-builds` repository.
Signed-off-by: Michael Keller <github@ike.ch>
The necessary keys to do so aren't available (and of course we don't try
to post a release on pull requests, anyway).
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
What a pain. It turns out that github.run_number is counting the number of
times a specific workflow has been run - but that's different for different
workflows, so using that won't get us a single tag with all the corresponding
build artifacts. And sadly I can't find a simple atomic way to increase a
GitHUb repo variable, so I came up with this somewhat convoluted dance, using
the the fact that a push to an existing brach that isn't a fast-forward will
fail.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Fix the 'Snap USNs' action.
According to https://bugs.launchpad.net/lazr.restfulclient/+bug/2041407
the an incompatibility is introduced by the move from python 3.11 to
3.12, and a workaround is to pin the version to 3.11.
Signed-off-by: Michael Keller <github@ike.ch>
This way our ongoing releases will be in their own repo.
Also, use a nicer date format (at least I think this looks nicer).
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
We need some additional options when building the package, so let that script
handle the details and use the generic build script mainly for the dependencies.
Also let's not mix building for testing and building the DMG - just so I can
stay somewhat sane.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Pull requests can be triggered by anyone - we should not publish code
that comes in through pull requests to either GitHub releases or
Launchpad, Copr, etc.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
