ci: Add build-test-publish-wheel workflow
#114
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Oliver Koenig <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Oliver Koenig <[email protected]>
| @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ | |||
| FROM python:3.12 as nemo-run-update | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't really need a docker file for NeMo-Run since it can be pip installed everywhere and is relatively limited in scope.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd need to refactor the workflows a bit for this, but I think it would be worth doing so. Let me compare across projects if there some barriers I'm not seeing yet
|
|
||
| jobs: | ||
| build-test-publish-wheel: | ||
| uses: NVIDIA/NeMo-FW-CI-templates/.github/workflows/[email protected] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We use rye/uv for pacakge management. Can we use it to build and publish the package as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Out of curiosity, what would be the benefit? My workflows use standard build and twine for building and publishing. It should be complaint to rye and uv since it also follows PEP standards. Not all projects use rye/uv so I need to find a common denominator across projects. Of course we could allow injection your own custom tool, but I wonder which benefit it would bring
| # limitations under the License. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| MAJOR = 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have hatch's vcs for versioning currently. See here - https://github.com/NVIDIA/NeMo-Run/blob/main/pyproject.toml#L118-L122.
Can you remove it if the versions are going to be manually maintained?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh that's sad, hatch seems like a cool tool. But I can't see how it fits into Nemo's release cycle. Because both pre-release and releases are rather github-workflow than some-other-cli-tool driven. I'd remove hatch for now
| @@ -32,6 +33,11 @@ | |||
| from nemo_run.run.experiment import Experiment | |||
| from nemo_run.run.plugin import ExperimentPlugin as Plugin | |||
|
|
|||
| from .package_info import (__contact_emails__, __contact_names__, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we use absolute path here?
No description provided.