Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement clean up actions #50

Open
stevefan1999-personal opened this issue Dec 4, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

Implement clean up actions #50

stevefan1999-personal opened this issue Dec 4, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@stevefan1999-personal
Copy link

It seems like the k3d cluster was not destroyed post action. This means things lie https://github.com/nektos/act cannot operator correctly without manually deleting the existing nodes.

@kuritka
Copy link
Collaborator

kuritka commented Dec 4, 2023

Thx @stevefan1999-personal. Can you please send me more information. Maybe create some simplified example where nodes are not deleted ?

@stevefan1999-personal
Copy link
Author

@kuritka Just run a simple k3d-action example with https://github.com/nektos/act and run it again. The action will fail with existing cluster error which it is still indeed in Docker

@kuritka
Copy link
Collaborator

kuritka commented Dec 4, 2023

How about deleting the container and recreating a new one for each workflow run, rather than maintaining the state of one existing container ?

@stevefan1999-personal
Copy link
Author

stevefan1999-personal commented Dec 4, 2023

How about deleting the container and recreating a new one for each workflow run, rather than maintaining the state of one existing container ?

At least https://github.com/nektos/act doesn't because it run bare docker run behind the scene, and act doesn't manage the external state of k3d.

Maybe it works with official Github Actions which runs in an isolated VM environment that will ultimately be destroyed forcefully after each run, but this is not the case for act.

And if you look at https://github.com/helm/kind-action/tree/main, they also have clean up phase which I think is reasonable.

@kuritka
Copy link
Collaborator

kuritka commented Dec 5, 2023

@somaritane , @jkremser Guys, if you have any suggestions, or tou like to oppose, let us know here. PR already exists. For me it's not a bad idea, I wrote some comments on the PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants