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
Setup turborepo #45
Setup turborepo #45
Conversation
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wow, this is fast! I'm so pumped for this.
build
Tasks: 4 successful, 4 total
Cached: 4 cached, 4 total
Time: 464ms >>> FULL TURBO
And then a subsequent run:
Tasks: 4 successful, 4 total
Cached: 4 cached, 4 total
Time: 125ms >>> FULL TURBO
test
Tasks: 7 successful, 7 total
Cached: 3 cached, 7 total
Time: 16.024s
subsequent run (full cache):
Tasks: 7 successful, 7 total
Cached: 7 cached, 7 total
Time: 143ms >>> FULL TURBO
.github/workflows/ci.yml
Outdated
uses: felixmosh/turborepo-gh-artifacts@v1 | ||
with: | ||
repo-token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} | ||
server-token: foo-123 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not seeing this in https://github.com/felixmosh/turborepo-gh-artifacts#action-inputs, but in code seeing a description of An access token of the local turbo-server
. Is this required? Or does it help the Setup Tests
step in some way?
Looks like server-token
gets passed as --token
to the turbo CLI (https://turbo.build/repo/docs/reference/command-line-reference#--token), eh?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yup. For our use case the value doesn't matter 🎉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we have it then? We cannot just omit?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Last i checked, there are errors without. Like, turbo thinks setup is incomplete or something. It's been a while since i tried though, so i'll double check. Maybe something is different now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is great! 🚀
Left some minor comments, but approving already! Thanks for figuring this out!
.github/workflows/ci.yml
Outdated
uses: felixmosh/turborepo-gh-artifacts@v1 | ||
with: | ||
repo-token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} | ||
server-token: foo-123 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we have it then? We cannot just omit?
Co-authored-by: Simon Ihmig <simon.ihmig@gmail.com>
I found a pnpm bug! yay! pnpm/pnpm#5144 (comment) |
superseded by #52 |
In a monorepo, we don't want to run certain task more frequently than we have.
This enables C.I. to run faster, and save some energy
Previously (on main): https://github.com/CrowdStrike/ember-headless-form/actions/runs/4166228177/usage
Now (on this branch):
cache miss
full cache hit
Included extra reviewers, because this is something I want to introduce in toucan-core as well.
Test Plan
try things out locally, and provide feedback -- hopefully everything is "transparent" -- with the only places turbo deliberately isn't used:
pnpm lint:fix
pnpm start
-- though, I did add apnpm turbo:start
for testing -- turbo lacks the error-recovery behavior thatconcurrently
has (existingpnpm start
)