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

Add the simple RC workflow to validate Go SDK with wordcount #34476

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

liferoad
Copy link
Contributor

@liferoad liferoad commented Mar 29, 2025

Addresses #34457

Need merge first and then do the real tests.


Thank you for your contribution! Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly and easily:

  • Mention the appropriate issue in your description (for example: addresses #123), if applicable. This will automatically add a link to the pull request in the issue. If you would like the issue to automatically close on merging the pull request, comment fixes #<ISSUE NUMBER> instead.
  • Update CHANGES.md with noteworthy changes.
  • If this contribution is large, please file an Apache Individual Contributor License Agreement.

See the Contributor Guide for more tips on how to make review process smoother.

To check the build health, please visit https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/.test-infra/BUILD_STATUS.md

GitHub Actions Tests Status (on master branch)

Build python source distribution and wheels
Python tests
Java tests
Go tests

See CI.md for more information about GitHub Actions CI or the workflows README to see a list of phrases to trigger workflows.

@liferoad liferoad marked this pull request as ready for review March 29, 2025 17:49
@github-actions github-actions bot added the build label Mar 29, 2025
@liferoad liferoad requested review from Abacn and damccorm March 29, 2025 17:50
Copy link
Contributor

Assigning reviewers. If you would like to opt out of this review, comment assign to next reviewer:

R: @Abacn for label build.

Available commands:

  • stop reviewer notifications - opt out of the automated review tooling
  • remind me after tests pass - tag the comment author after tests pass
  • waiting on author - shift the attention set back to the author (any comment or push by the author will return the attention set to the reviewers)

The PR bot will only process comments in the main thread (not review comments).

Copy link
Contributor

@damccorm damccorm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for doing this

- name: Set up environment
uses: ./.github/actions/setup-environment-action
with:
go-version: default, otherwise remove if default is 1.21
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should this be a comment? Seems like this will definitely error

working-directory: ./sdks/go/examples/wordcount
run: |
echo "--- PrismRunner WordCount Output ---"
cat output_prism.txt* # Output might be sharded
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the idea we will still ask folks to take a look at this output as part of the release instructions?

uses: actions/cache@v4
with:
path: |
~/.cache/go-build
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think we've built anything, so I don't think this will do anything. In general, I don't see any real value in this caching step; the go builds are quite fast anyways.

runs-on: self-hosted
outputs:
rc_tag: ${{ github.event.inputs.rc_tag }}
container_tag: ${{ github.event.inputs.container_tag }}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We don't need this as an output - instead of referencing outputs in future jobs, you can just directly reference github.event.inputs.container_tag - this just adds a layer of indirection

@liferoad
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the comments. The main goal for this PR is to create the stub for me to continue refining the workflow once this is merged first. I will address your comments later. Sounds good?

@damccorm
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the comments. The main goal for this PR is to create the stub for me to continue refining the workflow once this is merged first. I will address your comments later. Sounds good?

I'm fine with that as long as they get addressed. I do think they will make life easier for you though, so I'd recommend taking them :)

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants