Auto Build

[MatthijsBurgh]

Instead of requiring the build to be up-to-date, GH actions will push the build folder when the CI procedure has resulted in a diff.

To test it, I added some commits to push on this feature branch. The commit done by GH actions: 5112758

GH actions run: https://github.com/RobotWebTools/roslibjs/runs/2758087742?check_suite_focus=true

I dropped these commits again and forced pushed. I can't guarantee this will work with the branch protection on develop. But merge this PR is the only way to find out. There is no other way to test this.

Once approved, I will apply this to ros3djs and ros3djs too.

[MatthijsBurgh]

This will not work at the moment, because of the branch protection. https://github.com/RobotWebTools/roslibjs/runs/2773549430?check_suite_focus=true#step:6:50

[MatthijsBurgh]

To get the it working with branch protection, either a personal acces token(PAT) should be used. Or we should allow force pushes. I don't like to allow force pushes. Leaving a PAT as the only option. As recommened by the author of the GH Action used to commit the build (https://github.com/stefanzweifel/git-auto-commit-action#push-to-protected-branches), it is better to use a seperate (bot) account for that. So anyone from @RobotWebTools/roslibjs-maintainers who wants to create/maintain this seperate account? Or do you disagree want to provide your account for this?

[nuclearsandwich]

@MatthijsBurgh I'm still trying to fully understand the task at hand, but does it make sense to have the auto build action run on the pull request branch before it's merged into develop so that the HEAD commit of each PR is the auto-build commit? If you combine that workflow with a forward integration strategy (merging develop into the PR branch on each push/build), which can also be automated I think you can get the same result without performing automated pushes to the protected branch.

[MatthijsBurgh]

That would have multiple downsides.

• When you are working in a branch and you push. The remote will always add a commit and will be ahead of your local branch. A bit annoying IMO.
• When someone outside the maintainers opens a PR, we can't always commit to their branch. So that would require us to ask them to update the build or ask them to allow us to push to their branch.
• The new commit will not trigger a new run of the GH actions. On one side is this OK as the library did not change compare to the previous run. But because of this the PR test checks will not work. As the last commit will not have any tests.

[jihoonl]

I like the idea of pushing to the branch instead of develop branch. But, I'm not against to @MatthijsBurgh's opinion either. So, let's try it out first. We can always disable back if it doesn't work.

@MatthijsBurgh I have just created @RWT-bot account. Would you send me an email to jihoonlee.in at gmail dot com? So, I can send you account information. Or, what would be the good way of supporting this feature to get it done?

[MatthijsBurgh]

The bot does require admin rights to commit to the protected branch. I have tested it on develop2. The commit which updates the build does trigger a new action run. Which is a bit unnecessary. As the only diff is in the generated build folder.

I have added an if, so the jobs don't run on pushes by the RWT-bot. This doesn't influence the branch status, as an run is triggered. It just doesn't have any (failed) jobs, so it succeeds.

If you agree with this workflow, please approve.

[jihoonl]

Looks good to me. Let's give it a try.