Love the bold ideas here, and don't let the perfect be the enemy of the
good.  Quite a lot of automation is possible incrementally.  I have
borrowed from the Autobrr release workflow
<https://github.com/autobrr/autobrr/blob/develop/.github/workflows/release.yml>
;
it uses tag pushes to automatically build release artifacts and a Changelog
<https://github.com/autobrr/autobrr/releases/tag/v1.63.0>.  Only problem I
had with that workflow was when I pushed the tag without pushing the
commit, but that is easily fixed.

Ken

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:01 AM Jane Sandberg via Evergreen-dev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I like the idea of building tarballs when a tag is pushed!  The github
> integration with POEditor would be great.  In the meantime, one idea
> to handle translations automatically would be to create an ssh keypair for
> github actions to use to push translation commits to our own git server.
>
> El mié, 18 jun 2025 a la(s) 6:25 a.m., Jason Stephenson via Evergreen-dev (
> [email protected]) escribió:
>
>> Jane & Blake,
>>
>> I don't know if we really want tarballs for every commit. That seems like
>> a lot of artifacts hanging around. If we could get github to build tarballs
>> when a tag is created, that might be more useful in my humble opinion.
>>
>> As for automating the whole release process, if we could get the github
>> integration working with POEditor, then I think that takes care of the
>> translations. We could move the LP translations to POEditor and be done
>> with messing with translation exports and imports, etc.
>>
>> At that point, we could have github build the release tarballs, I think.
>>
>> Once we're doing that we could transition to github and shut down our own
>> git server.
>>
>> Just some thoughts before I build a release.
>>
>> Jason Stephenson
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 7:07 PM Blake via Evergreen-dev <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Jane,
>>>
>>> I'm all for it! I must have missed your previous post. It's the
>>> POEditor, LP translations and release notes pieces that seem to evade
>>> automation. Did you have something in mind for those or maybe for the
>>> purposes of this github automation we don't need* those things?
>>>
>>> -Blake-
>>> Conducting Magic
>>> Will consume any data format
>>> MOBIUS
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/17/25 5:44 PM, Jane Sandberg via Evergreen-dev wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Any feedback on this?  I'm building a release right now, and honestly
>>> I'm feeling quite burnt out about all the time-consuming and error-prone
>>> manual steps involved -- which are almost the exact same time-consuming and
>>> error-prone manual steps we've had for quite some time.
>>>
>>> I'd be very willing to put substantial effort towards the steps I
>>> proposed above.  If you have a different idea for how to approach the
>>> automation, please let me know and I'd be very happy to help with
>>> a different approach.  But I can't support the status quo: it uses far more
>>> of our community's precious time than it should, and it's far too easy to
>>> make a small mistake and create a bad release, and I've had enough of that.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your consideration,
>>>
>>>    -Jane
>>>
>>> El jue, 3 abr 2025 a la(s) 8:00 a.m., Jane Sandberg (
>>> [email protected]) escribió:
>>>
>>>> Hi Evergreeners,
>>>>
>>>> Throwing out a release process idea for your feedback: what if we had
>>>> github actions build tarballs on each commit (using make_release in
>>>> build-only mode)?
>>>>
>>>> In my imagination: the release process would be much the same as it is
>>>> today until the make_release step.  The builder would generate the upgrade
>>>> script and bump version numbers as they do today, then push those changes.
>>>> This push would trigger github actions to build the tarball, so the builder
>>>> wouldn't have to.
>>>>
>>>> As I see it:
>>>> * this would free us up from any issues and inconsistencies in the
>>>> tarballs that result from folks' different environments and/or unclear
>>>> instructions.
>>>> * folks could test the newest code from a tarball at any time
>>>> * if you catch a mistake after you're done building, you could simply
>>>> push the correction and wait for the robot to generate an adjusted tarball,
>>>> rather than needing to spin up your environment again or coordinate with
>>>> somebody else.
>>>> * since make_release would be running *all* the time, we would be able
>>>> to catch errors we introduce to that script early
>>>> * this would be an incremental step towards yet more automation of the
>>>> build/release process
>>>>
>>>> I believe we'd need to expire those tarballs after a certain amount of
>>>> time so we don't hit github storage limits.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>   -Jane
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evergreen-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evergreen-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Jason Stephenson (he/him)
>> ILS Manager, C/W MARS, Inc.
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> [image: icon] [email protected] | [image: icon]www.cwmars.org
>>
>> [image: icon] 508-755-3323 x 418
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evergreen-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>> [email protected]
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Evergreen-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>


-- 
-Ken
_______________________________________________
Evergreen-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to