-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 89
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
Current GH action caching boilerplate is too complex and out of sync with the official actions/setup-node #68
Comments
Sounds like a bug on |
But I do agree that currently, the only way to do cache is a bit to complex, if |
The solution documented by The maintainers of
I don't think
I do think, however, that the README should document the convenience caching method provided by For advanced caching use cases, in my opinion, |
First off, love pnpm ❤️
I've been gradually replacing
yarn v1
withpnpm
in all of my OSS repos, and adding pnpm to GitHub actions is currently kind of ugly / verbose / error-prone.The official actions/setup-node guide also recommends a completely different, simpler approach which doesn't seem to work. See the
Caching pnpm (v6.10+) dependencies
in their guide, which uses the much simplercache: 'pnpm'
parameter. Since this is how caching works fornpm
andyarn
, I fully expectedpnpm
caching to "just work" using the officialactions/setup-node
guide, but it doesn't appear to.Here's an example of the boilerplate that I'm currently using which matches the caching setup recommended by this repo's readme. As far as I can tell, the caching is taking effect, BUT it seems brittle to have this logic spread across N repositories instead of in
pnpm/action-setup
and/or the official GitHubactions/setup-node
.For maintainers with lots of repos like myself, this is an annoyance that I know will cause a maintenance burden down the line.
So I'm opening this issue to get feedback and track a better solution going forwards.
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: