Skip to content
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 req] Make file name the default #349

Open
Martmists-GH opened this issue Sep 30, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

[feat req] Make file name the default #349

Martmists-GH opened this issue Sep 30, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Martmists-GH
Copy link

What would you like to be added?

From the README:


Uploading without an artifact name

You can upload an artifact without specifying a name

- uses: actions/upload-artifact@v3
  with:
    path: path/to/artifact/world.txt

If not provided, artifact will be used as the default name which will manifest itself in the UI after upload.


For many purposes it would be beneficial to use the name of the file (world.txt in the above example) instead of artifact

Why is this needed?

Examples are:

  • Projects with a versioning system outside of git tags (e.g. manual versions, semver bots, etc)
  • Projects with versions based on dates (e.g. Ghidra extensions)
  • Projects with versions based on dependencies (e.g. modular systems which use format <version>+<other_version>)
@Martmists-GH Martmists-GH added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 30, 2022
@Xottab-DUTY
Copy link

Agree on this! Why not just parse the file name...

@tgross35
Copy link

tgross35 commented Jun 8, 2023

I'd like a name for wildcard imports to turn into multiple artifacts. For example, with the following listing:

/artifacts
   foo.zip
   bar.tar.gz
   baz.tar.gz

And the following configuration:

- uses: actions/upload-artifact@v3
  with:
    path: /artifacts/*

It would be nice if three artifacts were created and could be downloaded separately: foo.zip, bar.tar.gz, and baz.tar.gz.

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this issue Jun 17, 2023
…ulacrum

Publish docs as github artifacts during CI

Discussed here: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/242791-t-infra/topic/Building.20docs.20for.20PR.20CI

The goal is to make docs available for download after CI runs on PRs, for easy review of API changes.

Notes:

- Currently this only captures library documentation (`core`, `alloc`, `std`, `test`, `proc_macro`)
- You can't see artifacts until the entire workflow run has completed actions/upload-artifact#53
- There is currently a generic file name `ci-artifacts`. No way to customize this based on contained files unfortunately actions/upload-artifact#349

You can find the results at the bottom of the CI "summary" page:

<img width="379" alt="image" src="https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/assets/13724985/d3748e59-242c-40f8-9f54-82177b9b481b">
bors added a commit to rust-lang/miri that referenced this issue Jun 17, 2023
Publish docs as github artifacts during CI

Discussed here: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/242791-t-infra/topic/Building.20docs.20for.20PR.20CI

The goal is to make docs available for download after CI runs on PRs, for easy review of API changes.

Notes:

- Currently this only captures library documentation (`core`, `alloc`, `std`, `test`, `proc_macro`)
- You can't see artifacts until the entire workflow run has completed actions/upload-artifact#53
- There is currently a generic file name `ci-artifacts`. No way to customize this based on contained files unfortunately actions/upload-artifact#349

You can find the results at the bottom of the CI "summary" page:

<img width="379" alt="image" src="https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/assets/13724985/d3748e59-242c-40f8-9f54-82177b9b481b">
@wiiznokes
Copy link

seriously, this need to be fixed

@IvanoAlvino
Copy link

I would really love this feature as well :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants