Skip to content

Setup nextstrain cli update#48

Merged
joverlee521 merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
setup-nextstrain-cli-update
Sep 1, 2023
Merged

Setup nextstrain cli update#48
joverlee521 merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
setup-nextstrain-cli-update

Conversation

@joverlee521
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@joverlee521 joverlee521 commented Sep 1, 2023

Description of proposed changes

There's a weird issue with the Conda runtime where the inital setup
uses an older version.¹ Do an update of the default runtime after setup
to ensure we are using the latest version.

We could remove this extra step after we rework nextstrain setup to
use the same logic as nextstrain update.

¹ nextstrain/mpox#177

Checklist

  • Checks pass

There's a weird issue with the Conda runtime where the inital setup
uses an older version.¹ Do an update of the default runtime after setup
to ensure we are using the latest version.

We could remove this extra step after we rework `nextstrain setup` to
use the same logic as `nextstrain update`.

¹ nextstrain/mpox#177
We could start using the workflow-context action like the
pathogen-repo-build workflow, but that will require all uses of the
pathogen-repo-ci to be updated to give id-token write permissions.

That's a bigger change that I think can be done separately.
@joverlee521 joverlee521 merged commit 98a963c into master Sep 1, 2023
@joverlee521 joverlee521 deleted the setup-nextstrain-cli-update branch September 1, 2023 18:17
joverlee521 added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 5, 2023
I missed in #48 that the
command `nextstrain update` will exit with error for aws-batch and
ambient runtimes. Instead of maintaining a list of runtime to run the
update command, just allow it to continue-on-error.
genehack added a commit that referenced this pull request May 15, 2024
Per Jover,

> This is testing the workaround for continue-on-error added in #40
> works as expected. Reading through that discussion again, @tsibley
> had noted that we can eventually remove the test.

The workaround has been working for a ~year now, so I think it's safe
to remove the test now!
genehack added a commit that referenced this pull request May 15, 2024
Per Jover,

> This is testing the workaround for continue-on-error added in #40
> works as expected. Reading through that discussion again, @tsibley
> had noted that we can eventually remove the test.

> The workaround has been working for a ~year now, so I think it's
> safe to remove the test now!
genehack added a commit that referenced this pull request May 16, 2024
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants