disco icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
disco copied to clipboard
verified publisher icon epfml

deploy on every merge

Open tharvik opened this issue 1 year ago • 3 comments

currently, the deployed server & webapp are quite old (~7 months). per monday discussion, let's move to have rolling releases

  • [ ] merge separated "production" & "development" branches into a single "main" branch
    • [ ] rename all references to old branches in doc & GA workflows
    • would need access to repo settings or sync w/ someone having it
  • [x] auto-publish server to ~~docker hub~~ github pkgs
    • greatly simplify usage by providing an already built image of the server
    • do we have an account there already?
  • [x] auto-publish packages to NPM
    • as patch version with date on dev tag
    • would be nice to happen after #621
    • would need access to NPM's @epfml orga or sync w/ someone having it
  • [x] auto-publish pages

tharvik avatar Feb 27 '24 16:02 tharvik

Now that we are planning a release, would it be better to keep separate develop and production branches? discolab.ai could be deployed from production on a release basis, while develop would not be deployed and only used in local

JulienVig avatar Jul 23 '24 07:07 JulienVig

that was the historical idea but I don't think that it'll give us a pratical workflow.

  • when we are implementing UI changes/updates, depoying with develop is a good way for others to give us feedback without having to spin their copy locally
  • releases will contain documented security bugs
    • having quicker release would fix that but based on previous ones, I'm don't think that's frequent enough (for now)
  • it's a demo afterall, expect dragons
    • we can add a note in the deployement readme: "if you need to rely on a specific release of disco and not the current one, please talk with us about your use-case" (I'm in the idea that if someone do need a fixed release, they are techsavy enough to spin it themself, or that we broke something so bad that we probably need to know more about it)

we can instead have a way to select the version that users want to run (such as in many documentation website), but that doesn't solve the security issue (we would need to backport patches which is well, time-consuming).

tharvik avatar Jul 23 '24 10:07 tharvik

Sounds good! I was being worried of deploying bugs has it may have happened in the past..

JulienVig avatar Jul 23 '24 11:07 JulienVig