feat(ci): mirror deploy-semantic mise deploy dependencies in deploy.yml
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 52/100
- Issue type
- Feature
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Active
- Tech stack
- aws, github-actions, typescript
- Domain
- ci-cd, devops, infrastructure
Research direction
Start with [tasks.deploy] in cdk/mise.toml around line 80, .github/workflows/deploy.yml at line 262, and cdk/src/main.ts around line 68. Compare the deploy paths and the existing check:transitive-pin-sync guard before deciding how to represent deploy-semantic dependencies. Done means the distinction is documented and deploy-semantic dependencies cannot silently diverge from the CI path, while clean:disk remains local-only.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Component
CDK / infrastructure (cdk/mise.toml, .github/workflows/deploy.yml)
Describe the feature
Make it explicit — and ideally enforced — which [tasks.deploy] dependencies in cdk/mise.toml apply to the CI deploy path, because today none of them do and nothing says so.
.github/workflows/deploy.yml:262 deploys with npx cdk deploy directly, so it runs no depends entry from cdk/mise.toml:80. Verified on main (c77f1bd0):
.github/workflows/deploy.yml:262
run: npx cdk deploy --app cdk/cdk.out --all --require-approval never
cdk/mise.toml:80
depends = [":clean:disk"]
run = "npx cdk deploy"
CI passes no stackName context, so it deploys the default backgroundagent-dev (cdk/src/main.ts:68) — the same stack a local mise //cdk:deploy targets, via a path with different preparation.
Nothing is broken today, and the divergence is not simply an oversight: clean:disk begins rm -rf cdk.out, while the CI job deploys --app cdk/cdk.out against a cloud assembly downloaded as an artifact from the build workflow. Having CI invoke the mise task would delete the assembly it is about to deploy. So skipping clean:disk in CI is correct — it is a local-synth disk concern with no meaning on a runner.
Use case
The list reads as "things that happen before a deploy" but means "before a local deploy", and there is no signal at the definition to say which. A dependency added for deploy-correctness rather than local hygiene therefore applies to laptops only, silently.
That case is about to exist. #705 adds a :preflight:log-delivery dependency performing a one-time migration a stack must complete before its next deploy, or that deploy fails mid-update and rolls back. On the CI path it would not run, and the failure it prevents would return with nothing pointing at the cause.
Proposed solution
Either is cheap; the second is more durable.
-
Classify at the definition. Mark each
dependsentry as local-only or deploy-semantic, and port the deploy-semantic ones intodeploy.ymlas their own steps. Add a note on[tasks.deploy]thatdeploy.ymlis a parallel path inheriting nothing, so the next person does not assume otherwise. -
Make the divergence loud. A drift check asserting every deploy-semantic
dependsentry has a correspondingdeploy.ymlstep converts "someone remembers" into a build failure — the same shape as the existingcheck:transitive-pin-syncguard for a pin that must be mirrored in two places.
Explicitly not proposing that CI call the mise task, for the cdk.out reason above.
Other information
Found while verifying #705, and deliberately kept out of that PR: the divergence predates it, and #705's own reviewer asked for a migration plus a documented operator step rather than deploy-path parity.
Also unaddressed by either option: a bare cdk deploy on a developer machine skips the same dependencies. Closing that would mean moving deploy-semantic preparation inside the CDK app's synth path, which is a materially larger change.
- Dominant language
- TypeScript
- Stars
- 158
- Forks
- 49
- Avg merge
- 3d 7h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 17
Getting set up
- No Dockerfile or Docker Compose file
- Has a pull request template
- Read the contributing guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from aws-samples/sample-autonomous-cloud-coding-agents
-
bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
aws-samples/sample-autonomous-cloud-coding-agents#908 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
bug v1
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
aws-samples/sample-autonomous-cloud-coding-agents#886 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
bug v1
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 80/100
aws-samples/sample-autonomous-cloud-coding-agents#861 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
documentation P2 security
Difficulty 2/5 1-2 days Newbie friendliness 74/100
aws-samples/sample-autonomous-cloud-coding-agents#793 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Docs: How to clear previously set attributes for a blueprintMay be free again @rkumarus-aws claimed this 43 days ago, and no pull request is open. Opendocumentation
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
aws-samples/sample-autonomous-cloud-coding-agents#767 · 2 comments ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
All issues in aws-samples/sample-autonomous-cloud-coding-agents
Similar issues
-
Create/import wallet form shows raw "password must be at least 1 characters" instead of the translated messagePossibly taken @CapThunder19 claimed this today. Openbug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
joinmarket-webui/jam#1538 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
t0ggles
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 70/100
nolimits4web/swiper#8240 · 1 comment ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 72/100
modelcontextprotocol/inspector#2723 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
status:approved type:bug
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 70/100
egdev6/quorb#109 · 1 comment ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day