Skip to content

ci: Add package pre-publish check#1893

Open
vdusek wants to merge 3 commits into
masterfrom
ci/verify-built-package
Open

ci: Add package pre-publish check#1893
vdusek wants to merge 3 commits into
masterfrom
ci/verify-built-package

Conversation

@vdusek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@vdusek vdusek commented May 12, 2026

Summary

Adds an end-to-end check that the built sdist and wheel install cleanly, expose the expected sources and data files (py.typed, project_template/**, _redis/lua_scripts/*.lua), and pass an import + crawlee create smoke test — guarding against the silent failure mode behind #1890.

Wired into every PR via a new reusable _check_package.yaml, and into both stable and beta release workflows so the exact artifact about to hit PyPI is verified first.

@vdusek vdusek added t-tooling Issues with this label are in the ownership of the tooling team. adhoc Ad-hoc unplanned task added during the sprint. labels May 12, 2026
@vdusek vdusek self-assigned this May 12, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added this to the 140th sprint - Tooling team milestone May 12, 2026
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented May 12, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 92.84%. Comparing base (4023314) to head (92ad341).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1893      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.86%   92.84%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         167      167              
  Lines       11699    11699              
==========================================
- Hits        10864    10862       -2     
- Misses        835      837       +2     
Flag Coverage Δ
unit 92.84% <ø> (-0.02%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@vdusek vdusek force-pushed the ci/verify-built-package branch from d3b1195 to 5b35186 Compare May 12, 2026 09:07
@vdusek vdusek requested a review from janbuchar May 13, 2026 16:39
@vdusek vdusek marked this pull request as ready for review May 13, 2026 16:39
@vdusek vdusek changed the title ci: Add package verification check ci: Add package pre-publish check May 13, 2026
@vdusek vdusek force-pushed the ci/verify-built-package branch from 153d5ca to 7ca1e0b Compare May 14, 2026 09:24
vdusek and others added 2 commits May 14, 2026 11:30
…ction

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Comment on lines +29 to +47
- name: Verify built package
uses: apify/workflows/python-package-check@main
with:
package_name: crawlee
src_package_dir: src/crawlee
dist_dir: dist
python_version: "3.14"
extras: all
smoke_code: |
from crawlee.crawlers import (
HttpCrawler, BeautifulSoupCrawler, ParselCrawler,
PlaywrightCrawler, AdaptivePlaywrightCrawler,
)
from crawlee.storages import Dataset, KeyValueStore, RequestQueue
from crawlee.http_clients import HttpxHttpClient, ImpitHttpClient
from crawlee import Request
HttpCrawler()
BeautifulSoupCrawler()
ParselCrawler()
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see this is repeated three times in the diff - is that necessary? Or a lesser evil than setting up a reusable workflow/action?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

adhoc Ad-hoc unplanned task added during the sprint. t-tooling Issues with this label are in the ownership of the tooling team.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants