This message was deleted.
# hobbyfarm
a
This message was deleted.
c
In gargantua repository for instance
f
Deleted Stale Branches βœ…
πŸ™Œ 1
c
Thanks! There's not much I can do right now but I would share what my new eyes can see if that doesn't bother the team
f
That would be very helpful. At least i can not see gargantua from the eyes of a "beginner". Anything that helps us onboard new people will help.
c
That's my goal! I started a Pull Request with document updates and suggestions
f
I saw that. I already made a comment πŸ˜›
πŸ˜‹ 1
c
Nice thanks
f
and welcome to the project btw πŸ˜„
πŸ˜„ 1
c
For the PR it's really for discussion/suggestion and I just started πŸ™‚ Currently I'm trying to make gargantua works on my machine
f
Sure:
Regarding CI/PKG split, it's a best practice from my experience but I can revert it. It was more a suggestion :)
No that is totally fine i just wanted to point out that in the CI part gargantua is build via the pipeline (go build) and then again in the dockerfile. The go build in the pipeline would not be used. Regarding the Dockerfile base. The pipeline runs on a Ubuntu VM - so this should not be an issue using the binary produced in the dockerfile or am i missing smth?
c
No but it's human proof πŸ™‚ Imagine someone changes the image in GitHub Actions not knowing about the Dockerfile. I'm certainly to hurt by my experience. Don't want to bother you with this, I'll rollback
f
okey i see what you mean.
c
I like the idea to speed the CI!
f
Yes. It took forever. We just refactored the pipeline during a small hackathon at kubecon
c
Oh I see, ok I didn't know. Not cool 😞
f
But creating CI and PKG workflows is a good idea. we should do that
c
If that's ok I can do that for all repos, pipelines is one of my stuff πŸ™‚
f
sure! i am looking forward for your owrk
πŸ™ 1