Skip to content
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

fix(ci): sitemap generation #229

Merged

Conversation

vados-cosmonic
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Signed-off-by: Victor Adossi <[email protected]>
@vados-cosmonic vados-cosmonic force-pushed the fix(ci)=sitemap-generation branch from 0f81193 to c817a8f Compare March 25, 2025 05:33
@vados-cosmonic
Copy link
Contributor Author

vados-cosmonic commented Mar 25, 2025

Hey @itowlson if we want to revert I think we have to go back to here 24d7eb9, which is a bit difficult to do with the merge commits in the history (and a long way back).

I'm trying to fix the python step instead -- it relies on relative paths so the output directory change broke that too unfortunately. This PR fixes that, but again is unfortunately another ~4min wait to ensure it works properly (in CI -- I already checked locally and it works).

@vados-cosmonic
Copy link
Contributor Author

If you wouldn't mind just one more time 🤞 , I think this will finally fix all the steps for deploy.

@itowlson itowlson merged commit 7f7681a into bytecodealliance:main Mar 25, 2025
@itowlson
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks and belatedly merged!

@vados-cosmonic vados-cosmonic deleted the fix(ci)=sitemap-generation branch March 25, 2025 09:26
@vados-cosmonic
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the patience here, glad to note that the docs are back 😅

It's unfortunate it took this many steps to iron out CI -- hopefully I can make this process even more error-proof as part of #226 . I think it might be useful to:

  • Change (and maybe factor out) the build process to produce a zip file artifact
  • Introduce a top level script file (I am partial to just as an ergonomic make replacement) so that we stop cding around in CI
  • Update the python script to only deal with absolute/script-relative paths (running via just obviates this but this is a nice to have)
  • Refactor publish to only take the artifact and then deploy to pages
  • Enable publish workflow to work on any commit (this way, we can "roll back" without actually rolling back code), so we could have just rolled back to a working commit the first time CI went wrong 😮‍💨

@itowlson
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you for working through the series of fixes! Your suggestions for making this more reliable and understandable sound good - in particular I'm 100% up for running a lot more of this stuff during the PR process. I also like the idea of a manual publish workflow for rapid rollback - that speaks to my risk-averse soul!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants