fix: correct the build-script justification, which was factually wrong - #18
Merged
Conversation
#16 said the `build-script` input existed because "five of the six callers use `build:noci` and sohl, whose `build` does not reinstall, passes `build`". The second half is false. In all six repositories `build` is literally `npm ci && npm run build:noci`, sohl included — so it does reinstall, and sohl's release has been running a redundant `npm ci` on top of the install two steps earlier. Nothing varies on this axis at all: every caller can take the `build:noci` default, sohl included. The input stays anyway, but on honest grounds — it is the same named-script seam deploy-package-site.yml makes with `build:site`, so a package whose script is named differently can call this without editing it. An input every caller leaves alone is a seam; the one worth refusing is an input that invites callers to differ where they currently agree, which is why `build:pack-release` is still fixed. The sohl caller example loses its `build-script: build` line accordingly. Left in, it would have instructed the sixth adoption to carry the redundant install across deliberately. No behaviour change: the default was already `build:noci` and the only adopter so far does not pass this input.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
fix: correct the build-script justification, which was factually wrong
#16 said the
build-scriptinput existed because "five of the six callers usebuild:nociand sohl, whosebuilddoes not reinstall, passesbuild". Thesecond half is false. In all six repositories
buildis literallynpm ci && npm run build:noci, sohl included — so it does reinstall, andsohl's release has been running a redundant
npm cion top of the install twosteps earlier.
Nothing varies on this axis at all: every caller can take the
build:nocidefault, sohl included. The input stays anyway, but on honest grounds — it is
the same named-script seam deploy-package-site.yml makes with
build:site, soa package whose script is named differently can call this without editing it.
An input every caller leaves alone is a seam; the one worth refusing is an
input that invites callers to differ where they currently agree, which is why
build:pack-releaseis still fixed.The sohl caller example loses its
build-script: buildline accordingly. Leftin, it would have instructed the sixth adoption to carry the redundant install
across deliberately.
No behaviour change: the default was already
build:nociand the only adopterso far does not pass this input.