prepare: rename output component-descriptor -> component-descriptor-artefact#1645
prepare: rename output component-descriptor -> component-descriptor-artefact#1645ccwienk wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
gardener-prow
Bot
added
do-not-merge/needs-kind
9bb17f0 to
a83abb3
Compare
| version: ${{ steps.version.outputs.version }} | ||
| commit-digest: ${{ steps.version.outputs.commit-digest }} | ||
| component-descriptor: ${{ steps.component-descriptor.outputs.component-descriptor-artifact }} | ||
| component-descriptor-artefact: ${{ steps.component-descriptor.outputs.component-descriptor-artifact }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have noticed a mix of usage of british/american artefact and artifect in the wf/actions in this repo.
Would it make sense to unify all usages and use only 1 term?
As to no cause confusion.
That could potentially cause breaking changes ofc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@IndritFejza : by default, this repository uses BE (so artEfact). however, GitHub-Actions-ArtIfacts are written according to AE, so in this specific case, AE seems better to avoid confusion w/ upstream API.
you are right, however, about incompatibility (so I would prefer to accept AE/BE-mix to avoid another round of downstream-updates..)
ccwienk
removed
the
do-not-merge/needs-kind
2 participants
Renames the
component-descriptorworkflow output ofprepare.yamltocomponent-descriptor-artefact, making it unambiguous that the value is anartifact name, not inline YAML (incompatible change).