Hacktoberfest 2026:メンテナが10月に向けて印を付けた、オープンで初心者向けの issue。 Hacktoberfest の issue を見る

Provide build artifacts

オープン
#1,390 コメント 0 件 リアクション 0 件 担当者 0 名 GitHub で見る

まだ誰も着手していません。

評価

難易度
5/5
見積もり時間
1週間以上
初心者へのやさしさ
28/100
issue の種類
機能追加
明瞭さ
おおむね明確
活発さ
停滞
技術スタック
perl

調査の方向性

まず、issue で指定されている入口であるディスカッション #1304 と、リポジトリの Travis CI および Dist::Zilla の設定を読みます。release-artifact と default-branch の build 提案を比較します。完了とは、完全な authoring 環境を必要とせずに、利用可能なビルド済みアーティファクトを公開する、合意済みでテスト済みの方法が確立されることです。

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。

説明

User story

As a package maintainer,
I would like to use pre-built artifacts for packaging,
so I can avoid pulling in the whole authoring environment as build dependencies.

Describe the solution you'd like

The idea is to save the build results for each successfully tested commit of the default git branch, and ask Travis CI to publish them somewhere (e.g. in a separate branch, or repo). That way package maintainers may decide between using these pre-built "git builds" as installation source, packaging the whole build system, or anything in between (e.g. drop the author plugins, and only package the rest).

  • idea 1: save build directory (or tarball) of tagged releases as standard GitHub Releases
  • idea 2: save build directory (or tarball) of each successfully built commit from the default git branch ("bleeding edge builds")

Describe alternatives you've considered

See the discussion #1304. That is originally about implementing the patching logic which can be executed during package build time, but also touches using vendor-specific dist.ini files, or just maintaining the diff for them (ideally the discussion could have taken place in an issue first, but I don't want to duplicate everything by copying text over here now).

I'm also not comfortable bringing in vendor-specific packaging details into the project scope, mostly because if a vendor would like to build Rex differently than upstream, that is great, but I think it still primarily is a decision and concern of the vendor. That may be rephrased as: "we supply how we intend Rex to be built; that's completely fine if you have a different opinion, and feel free to build it differently, but that's your choice".

Additional context

The build process of Rex relies on various Dist::Zilla plugins. Some of it is important only for authors (people who modify Rex itself), and strictly speaking only the rest are important for end-users (people who want to build and install Rex). Furthermore, there's a distinction between tagged releases and building from the default git branch.

OS packages for tagged releases can use pre-built sources e.g. from CPAN (while it would also be nice to upload these tarballs as GitHub Releases as well). But if you'd like write a package that builds Rex from source (like a specific commit or branch), the whole list of build dependencies has to be pulled in. That might impose a prohibitive cost on the packaging side, with relatively low returns in exchange (e.g. using Test::PerlTidy to ensure that the source code is tidy: it's mostly important for authors to keep the code style consistent, but less important for end-users who only want to run Rex).

主要言語
Perl
スター
736
フォーク
217
PR マージ指標
30日以内にマージされた PR はありません

環境構築

はじめの一歩

  1. issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
  2. 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
  3. リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
  4. issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。

RexOps/Rex のほかの issue

RexOps/Rex の issue をすべて見る

似ている issue

Perl の issue をもっと見る

新しい issue をメールで受け取る

初心者向けの GitHub issue を短くまとめたダイジェスト。