fix: disable profile CI when building reference docs
#2367
Conversation
| @@ -24,12 +24,8 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| <!--maven-resources-plugin:3.2.0:copy-resources fails: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MSHARED-966--> | |||
| <maven-resources-plugin.version>3.3.1</maven-resources-plugin.version> | |||
| <!-- override version inherited from spring-cloud-build parent to one that is available on Maven Central --> | |||
| <spring-asciidoctor-backends.version>0.0.4</spring-asciidoctor-backends.version> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not needed because asciidoctor backend version is 0.0.5 and available on Maven central.
|
The GH action to update reference docs ran successfully: https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/spring-cloud-gcp/actions/runs/6937045526/job/18870340753 |
| # there's env.GITHUB_API_URL defined in the environment by | ||
| # default. | ||
| # See https://github.com/spring-cloud/spring-cloud-build/blob/main/pom.xml#L1406C12-L1419. | ||
| ./mvnw clean install -P docs -P '!CI' -pl docs -DskipTests |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @lqiu96's help for debugging the root cause of process-asciidoc is not executed in GH action runner.
I intended to remove -q from the maven command for logging purpose.
JoeWang1127
changed the title
CI when building reference docs
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
| ./mvnw clean install -P docs -pl docs -DskipTests -q | ||
| # Disable profile CI (inherited from spring-cloud-build/pom.xml) so | ||
| # process-asciidoc can be executed in GH action runner. | ||
| # Profile CI will be activated in GH action runner because |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel the profile name "CI" and its activation condition are bad. Is it clear why the profile "CI" is set up like that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
CI profile was introduced based on this issue:
spring-cloud/spring-cloud-build#239
Don't access spring-doc-resources in CI builds[, because it] requires authentication to retrieve.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That assumption (pull request builds = GitHub Actions) is wrong. Now I know it's outside our codebase.
Fix #2101