-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
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
feat: Initial support for Terraform 1.9 versions #83
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Other than that, I think we should take the chance now that this work is fresh to write a small description for the PR or add a new section to the readme about how upgrades will be delivered in the future. Meaning, when a new version comes out and the build breaks, what needs to be changed to get it working asap. Maybe I'm just talking for myself, but I'll probably forget about some of it and having that handy will lighten the load for us.
@@ -52,10 +52,10 @@ jobs: | |||
run: | | |||
if grep -q authToken ~/.config/cachix/cachix.dhall; then | |||
echo "Cachix token is present" | |||
cachix watch-exec nixpkgs-terraform nix -- flake check | |||
cachix watch-exec nixpkgs-terraform nix -- flake check --max-jobs 2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't this defaulting to the max available cores?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@oscar-izval Yes, but I had to limit the number of concurrent builds to avoid running out of space:
Reference:
https://github.com/stackbuilders/nixpkgs-terraform/actions/runs/10237045402/job/28319853313
@oscar-izval Because the changes on this PR are primarily internal, I believe it is acceptable to explain the reasons for the change inside the scope of the PR; however, I am unsure about posting this in the README files because the content on this file is primarily intended for end users. What are your thoughts? |
Yeah, explaining that in the PR seems like the best approach |
Are there any blockers for this PR to get merged? Can I help with something? |
Problem:
Updating the "nixpkgs" inputs resulted in a huge number of packages being rebuilt.
Solution:
As this project is constrained by the resources available for GH operations, this PR replaces branch references in the "nixpkgs" inputs with fixed commits to give better control over which packages are rebuilt. While assigning inputs to specific commits is not ideal, this adjustment reduces the risk of unexpected rebuilds.