Hacktoberfest 2026:维护者为十月标记出来的 issue,仍然开放、适合新手。 浏览 Hacktoberfest issue

Provide build artifacts

未关闭
#1,390 0 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
5/5
预计耗时
一周以上
新手友好度
28/100
Issue 类型
功能
描述清晰度
基本清楚
活跃度
停滞
技术栈
perl

调研方向

首先阅读讨论 #1304 以及仓库的 Travis CI 和 Dist::Zilla 配置;issue 中将它们列为入口。比较 release-artifact 和 default-branch 的构建方案;完成的标准是确定一种经过同意和测试的方式,用于发布可用的预构建工件,而不要求完整的创作环境。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

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).

主要语言
Perl
星标
736
派生
217
PR 合并指标
30 天内没有已合并 PR

环境准备

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

RexOps/Rex 的其他 Issue

查看 RexOps/Rex 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Perl Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。