Add release workflow #3

SylvainSenechal · 2025-12-01T13:53:05Z

bert-e · 2025-12-01T13:53:09Z

Hello sylvainsenechal,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Available options

name	description	privileged	authored
`/after_pull_request`	Wait for the given pull request id to be merged before continuing with the current one.
`/bypass_author_approval`	Bypass the pull request author's approval	⭐
`/bypass_build_status`	Bypass the build and test status	⭐
`/bypass_commit_size`	Bypass the check on the size of the changeset `TBA`	⭐
`/bypass_incompatible_branch`	Bypass the check on the source branch prefix	⭐
`/bypass_jira_check`	Bypass the Jira issue check	⭐
`/bypass_peer_approval`	Bypass the pull request peers' approval	⭐
`/bypass_leader_approval`	Bypass the pull request leaders' approval	⭐
`/approve`	Instruct Bert-E that the author has approved the pull request.		✍️
`/create_pull_requests`	Allow the creation of integration pull requests.
`/create_integration_branches`	Allow the creation of integration branches.
`/no_octopus`	Prevent Wall-E from doing any octopus merge and use multiple consecutive merge instead
`/unanimity`	Change review acceptance criteria from `one reviewer at least` to `all reviewers`
`/wait`	Instruct Bert-E not to run until further notice.

Available commands

name	description	privileged
`/help`	Print Bert-E's manual in the pull request.
`/status`	Print Bert-E's current status in the pull request `TBA`
`/clear`	Remove all comments from Bert-E from the history `TBA`
`/retry`	Re-start a fresh build `TBA`
`/build`	Re-start a fresh build `TBA`
`/force_reset`	Delete integration branches & pull requests, and restart merge process from the beginning.
`/reset`	Try to remove integration branches unless there are commits on them which do not appear on the source branch.

Status report is not available.

ISSUE: CLDSRVCLT-7

bert-e · 2025-12-10T14:59:41Z

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

the author
2 peers

DarkIsDude · 2025-12-10T16:51:03Z

.github/workflows/release.yml

+run-name: release ${{ inputs.tag }}
+
+on:
+  # Uncomment to test your work as a release before it's merged


We should create a RELESAE.md instead of that 🙏

I disagree : to test release workflow, the best approach is to ..... write tests!

It is possible we do in Zenko and Vault: it allows writing tests in javascript/typescript which handle git setup, mocking GitHub (and other) APIs, and running the workflow with act in this environment.

(though sure, we could add a RELEASE.md file or section in README.md : but it should not be used for testing the release, but really to document how to do a release...)

I totally agree but I think that writing test for this simple setup is overengineered for me... Make sense for Zenko as the release workflow is much more complex.

My comment was not to not keep that here but to explain in a README that if we want to work on the workflow, we can do that and not keeping that hidden here.

I just found the test in zenko, but I don't know if it's worth it to do it, it looks moderately complicated for a simple lib. Here, what I wanted to do more specifically is, when a developer makes modifications to the client, they can uncomment and push this, to get a tag that they can use in their other project to test

.github/workflows/release.yml

francoisferrand · 2025-12-10T18:27:12Z

.github/workflows/release.yml

+      - name: Create Tag with Build Artifacts
+        run: |
+          # Configure git user to the GitHub Actions bot
+          git config --global user.name "github-actions[bot]"
+          git config --global user.email "github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com"
+
+          # Force add the build folders (even if they are in .gitignore)
+          git add -f dist build
+
+          # Determine tag name
+          TAG_NAME="${{ inputs.tag }}"
+          if [ -z "$TAG_NAME" ]; then
+            TAG_NAME="test-${{ github.sha }}"
+          fi
+
+          # Commit the build artifacts
+          git commit -m "Build artifacts for version $TAG_NAME"
+
+          # Create the tag
+          git tag $TAG_NAME
+
+          # Push the tag to the repository
+          git push origin $TAG_NAME
+
+          # Export tag name for next step
+          echo "tag_name=$TAG_NAME" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
+        id: create_tag


do we really want to push to git?

this creates releases outside of the development branches

this is not easily replicated for non-releases, which will makes testing integration more complex

the repo will not look the same at all for releases & dev, can be quite confusing

fundamentally, it uses Git as artifact storage.... while there is a dedicated tool: i.e. npm package registries...

→ should we not push to GitHub NPM registry ?
(there is an initial attempt here: scality/Guidelines#206)

let's rediscuss after or during daily, i'm not familiar with npm registry, but I feel like the current method is simple and relies and less dependency than having to work with npm

francoisferrand · 2025-12-10T18:29:19Z

.github/workflows/release.yml

+        uses: ./.github/actions/setup-smithy
+
+      - name: Build project
+        run: yarn build


does the "output" of yarn build get cached by setup-node, to speedup rebuilds?
if not, we should implement this kind of caching ourself (using actions/cache)

I think for the release.yml, we can do it without caching.
But I've got the same problem in the test file, so I'm gonna check if I can add caching for the tests

ISSUE: CLDSRVCLT-7

CLDSRVCLT-7

ISSUE: CLDSRVCLT-7

SylvainSenechal changed the base branch from development/1.0 to improvement/CLDSRVCLT-2 December 1, 2025 13:53

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-7 branch 3 times, most recently from b0e8cbd to 23e792a Compare December 1, 2025 15:15

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-2 branch 3 times, most recently from 17dca6a to b424f76 Compare December 3, 2025 11:06

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-7 branch 4 times, most recently from a98c3be to 101daf6 Compare December 3, 2025 14:53

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-2 branch 3 times, most recently from 58ae441 to dbfab6d Compare December 10, 2025 10:40

Base automatically changed from improvement/CLDSRVCLT-2 to development/1.0 December 10, 2025 14:24

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-7 branch 2 times, most recently from fbf3b02 to fe68438 Compare December 10, 2025 14:57

SylvainSenechal added 2 commits December 10, 2025 15:58

added release workflow

8cb8abc

ISSUE: CLDSRVCLT-7

update gitignore to ignore build following new release workflow

1e76042

ISSUE: CLDSRVCLT-7

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-7 branch from fe68438 to 1e76042 Compare December 10, 2025 14:58

SylvainSenechal marked this pull request as ready for review December 10, 2025 14:59

SylvainSenechal requested review from a team, DarkIsDude and benzekrimaha December 10, 2025 14:59

scality deleted a comment from bert-e Dec 10, 2025

DarkIsDude reviewed Dec 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

francoisferrand reviewed Dec 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

added cache for yarn build step

b08d42c

ISSUE: CLDSRVCLT-7

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-7 branch from 7799483 to b0cd583 Compare December 11, 2025 17:26

move common workflow steps into composite action

91ed87b

ISSUE: CLDSRVCLT-7

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-7 branch from b0cd583 to 91ed87b Compare December 11, 2025 17:37

update readme with release test process

adc3ab3

CLDSRVCLT-7

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-7 branch 9 times, most recently from ce70df1 to 1b3fe3d Compare December 12, 2025 15:36

npm registry

8ba141d

ISSUE: CLDSRVCLT-7

SylvainSenechal force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRVCLT-7 branch from 1b3fe3d to 8ba141d Compare December 12, 2025 15:41

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Add release workflow #3

Add release workflow #3

Uh oh!

SylvainSenechal commented Dec 1, 2025

Uh oh!

bert-e commented Dec 1, 2025

Uh oh!

bert-e commented Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

DarkIsDude Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

francoisferrand Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

DarkIsDude Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

SylvainSenechal Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

francoisferrand Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

SylvainSenechal Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

francoisferrand Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

SylvainSenechal Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Add release workflow #3

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Add release workflow #3

Uh oh!

Conversation

SylvainSenechal commented Dec 1, 2025

Uh oh!

bert-e commented Dec 1, 2025

Hello sylvainsenechal,

Uh oh!

bert-e commented Dec 10, 2025

Waiting for approval

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants