Support cache dependencies for cases where package lock files are located in subfolders #275

Activity

1. maxim-lobanov commented on Jun 30, 2021

   

   maxim-lobanov

   on Jun 30, 2021

   Contributor

   More actions

   Hello @bbugh , I don't think that you need working-directory input in setup-node task. This task just installs specified Node.js version and do nothing with working directory.

   If your package.json / project are located in the separate folder, I think you need to specify working-directory for next steps:

   - uses: actions/setup-node@v2
     with:
       node-version: '14'
       
   - name: Install dependencies and build project
     working-directory: some-client
     run: |
       npm install
       npm run build
       npm run test
2. bbugh commented on Jun 30, 2021

   

   bbugh

   on Jun 30, 2021

   Last edited by bbugh

   Author

   More actions

   Hi again! 👋 On the caching PR, I had asked about caching working for mono repos, and you had replied saying that's not supported yet. I created this issue to request that support. 😉

   Since GitHub actions has poor support for yaml and no reuse between steps, we have a lot of repetitive yarn tasks for caching and running. Having support built into this will be super helpful, and as we have a multi-language mono repo, we need to be able to run and cache them separately.

   In particular, Yarn 2's cache folder will be different for each project, as the default is <project>/.yarn and in the case of zero-installs would be committed to source control. In that case, a working-directory would be used to successfully run yarn in the correct location with the correct cache folder.

   Or a cache-root option, or something. I suggested working-directory because that's a standard configuration among most actions.
3. maxim-lobanov

   changed the title [-]Support working-directory input[/-] [+]Support cache dependencies for cases where package lock files are located in subfolders[/+] on Jun 30, 2021
4. maxim-lobanov commented on Jun 30, 2021

   

   maxim-lobanov

   on Jun 30, 2021

   Contributor

   More actions

   @bbugh caught it. I have renamed the issue title a bit to be more clear. Hope it works for you!
5. bbugh commented on Jun 30, 2021

   

   bbugh

   on Jun 30, 2021

   Author

   More actions

   I'm always reminding people about XY problems and here I did one myself. Thanks!
6. maxim-lobanov commented on Jul 15, 2021

   

   maxim-lobanov

   on Jul 15, 2021

   Contributor

   More actions

   Hello everyone!

   This feature request will be implemented soon. I have a small ADR under review #299 .
   Proposed approach is a bit different from proposed in this issue - we would like allow specifying full path (directory path + filename) to lock file instead of working_directory (directory path only). We believe this approach will be a bit more generic and unblock more use-cases.

   👍React with 👍5Reacted by Agostino Carandente, Eskild Diderichsen, mori yuta, Jens Willmer and Gregor Martynus

   🎉React with 🎉3Reacted by Brian Bugh, Michalina Cienciała and Ugo Popée
7. dmitry-shibanov

   self-assigned this

   on Jul 30, 2021
8. dmitry-shibanov commented on Aug 16, 2021

   

   dmitry-shibanov

   on Aug 16, 2021

   Contributor

   More actions

   Hello everyone, pull request with adding support of specifying lock files was merged. I'm closing the issue if you have any concerns, feel free to reopen it or ping me in the thread.

   🎉React with 🎉1Reacted by Jens Willmer
9. dmitry-shibanov

   closed this as completedon Aug 16, 2021
10. deining

    added a commit that references this issue on Nov 9, 2023

    Add `commit_sha` output (actions#275)

    ...

    5c82f36