Add 'cache-hit' as output - #327
Conversation
|
looking forward to getting this merged :-) |
|
@dmitry-shibanov I usually dont like to ping people, but is this something you can review? 🙂 |
|
Would love this feature! 😄 Really looking forward to it. I was just following this blog https://avraam.dev/posts/reducing-github-action-time and was going to use that feature with this action - but I see it is not supported yet |
|
Could you please review these simple changes @MaksimZhukov? |
|
Hello everyone. Sorry for the late reply. |
39ea519 to
d117871
Compare
That was it thanks! I rebased and force pushed the changes :) Feel free to review it now @dmitry-shibanov |
|
Hello @WtfJoke! Thank you for the contribution and sorry for the inconvenience! |
|
No worries :) Thanks for merging. |
I would have opened a pull request, but for some reason GitHub was preventing me to do so... Anyway, here's the description: This PR makes the action run on whatever has been checked out by previous steps. This is better because it makes the action faster and solves some issues that are caused by it pulling from the wrong ref (especially in PRs that involve a fork). The previous branch-related inputs have been removed, in favor of a new input called `new-branch`: this will allow you to create a new branch from the starting ref. If the branch already exists the action will try to push anyway, but that can result in the remote rejecting the push because it's not straightforward. For info on how to handle this situation, please check out the README. In conclusion, this PR makes the user responsible for handling branches, while still keeping an easy-to-use option to create new branches for those who need it: just make sure that you also consider when the branch already exists. Fixes actions#327
cache-hitstate #316Note to maintainers: I'm not sure about the changes in module.exports they came from the formatting task afaik. If you want I can revert these lines.