Repository navigation
The deploy command doesn’t work #8438
Description
Activity
This hasn’t been noticed because the CI no longer uses this command and instead runs pnpm run build. We’ll probably need to switch back to using pnpm run deploy.
When did we remove this?
To my understanding this is still a required command on our CI against the default branch?(Edit: it got indeed removed, IDK when and why)Rant: I hate when people keeping changing our CI and removing things and not telling me (not that there's an obligation, but I do feel lost amist the sea of changes), this is why things break.
cc @nodejs/web-infra / @nodejs/nodejs-website. If this continues, I'll probably issue a full repository lockdown and have me and @bmuenzenmeyer revisit our whole source. This is not acceptable, team. We oughta be more careful and give more time for sensitive changes to land, there's no need for us to be blazing fast with merging PRs that accure unnecessary risks (We ain't a startup), + Please let's stop the non-stop code refactors? Otherwise at some point no one is going to understand the source code anymore.
Keep in mind that
pnpm run deploy(aka full static builds) is a requirement imposed by the TSC, we need to restore that functionality 😓When did we remove this?
To my understanding this is still a required command on our CI against the default branch?(Edit: it got indeed removed, IDK when and why)Rant: I hate when people keeping changing our CI and removing things and not telling me (not that there's an obligation, but I do feel lost amist the sea of changes), this is why things break.
cc @nodejs/web-infra / @nodejs/nodejs-website. If this continues, I'll probably issue a full repository lockdown and have me and @bmuenzenmeyer revisit our whole source. This is not acceptable, team. We oughta be more careful and give more time for sensitive changes to land, there's no need for us to be blazing fast with merging PRs that accure unnecessary risks (We ain't a startup),
https://github.com/nodejs/nodejs.org/pull/8107/files#diff-5c3fa597431eda03ac3339ae6bf7f05e1a50d6fc7333679ec38e21b337cb6721 removed testing
pnpm run deployin CI -- this was a change that you approved + merged, with no other input from the wider team. Not sure I appreciate the rant blaming the entire team for moving fast and threatening to prevent us from working on the project when this was a change you moved fast on, on your own, without the team.Keep in mind that
pnpm run deploy(aka full static builds) is a requirement imposed by the TSC, we need to restore that functionality 😓Why is a fully static build a requirement, when we don't run static builds in production etc.? Is this requirement communicated/documented anywhere?
Investigating now
EDIT: Deploy has not been working sinc at least September, maybe longer
Reacted by Claudio Wunder and Igor Rodrigues MachadoKeep in mind that
pnpm run deploy(aka full static builds) is a requirement imposed by the TSC, we need to restore that functionality 😓Why is a fully static build a requirement, when we don't run static builds in production etc.? Is this requirement communicated/documented anywhere?
We're discussing this here (OpenJSF Slack) for anyone interested.
Investigating now
EDIT: Deploy has not been working sinc at least September, maybe longer
Being discussed on this Slack thread
- linked a pull request that will close this issuedocs(security.txt): move security.txt to .well-known folder #8436
on Dec 21, 2025 - removed a link to a pull requestdocs(security.txt): move security.txt to .well-known folder #8436
on Dec 21, 2025 but doesn't fully close this PR.
Why?
(Edit: Ignore the link above this, I have too many tabs open...)
I think there's some follow-up to do around actually validating the static export story. We should have more than just "does the command run" to be confident that the static export is something we could switch to at any point in time (as is the requirement imposed on us). I imagine that might take the form of visual regression testing between the static + server versions, or running E2Es against both versions, etc.
Shouldn't that be a seperate issue? The issue here (the command doesn't work) is resolved, but we should 100% open a follow up
Yah, agree it should be a seperate issue
Running the
pnpm run deploycommand locally, the site fails to compile because we’re using features that aren’t supported in a static export.This hasn’t been noticed because the CI no longer uses this command and instead runs
pnpm run build. We’ll probably need to switch back to usingpnpm run deploy.By the way, how is the site still building in production if it’s supposed to be using the deploy command? As far as I remember, the site was meant to be 100% static, although it might not be anymore.