-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27
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
"shep release" #139
Comments
I got snagged by this deploying and redeploying a new build of typeset the other day. This feels pretty high priority to me given how rapidly shep is being pushed. I think:
skipping tests seems fine. we aren't pushing code that hasn't run that project's travis? |
Travis is not sheps concern. So.. maybe we should run the tests? A danger here is builds get slow. We like our builds fast in general and we like to be able to work on stuff when debugging and quickly be able to upload to lambda. It's an edge shep has on all the other tools. I'd like to combine this discussion with #166 a little bit. Here's what I've been mulling over. I've got two concepts I want to introduce that give us the flexibility to work fast and debug while keeping us safe by doing the work a computer should do.
When making a dirty build I think we run our current build step, things just go. When making a "Deterministic" build we need np's checklist. How do we communicate this to our users? I've got two ideas shep deploy $STAGE
# vs
shep deploy --dirty $STAGE or shep deploy $STAGE
# vs
shep release $STAGE I'm partial to the release since it doesn't change behavior and we can bake in things like tagging the sha and pushing to github and junk like that. |
Yeah, thinking about shep as a build + deploy tool, we need to be running whatever tests are in the project on deploy. I like |
To prevent deploying with outdated deps or with errors. I think we should do what np does.
node_modules
andnpm install
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: