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

Add a tool-versions-folder param to specify non-standard .tool-versions locations #2

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: support-overriding-java-version
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rtyley
Copy link
Member

@rtyley rtyley commented Jan 10, 2025

guardian/setup-scala has assumed that the .tool-versions file will always be in the current working directory, but that's not always the case - eg: https://github.com/guardian/janus/pull/4527

One option to get around that, I think, would be to set working-directory: when invoking guardian/setup-scala:

    - name: Install Scala
      uses: guardian/setup-scala@v1
      working-directory: janus

...but maybe allowing specific-configuration of where this specific file is located is more expressive or future-proof?

    - name: Install Scala
      uses: guardian/setup-scala@v1
      tool-versions-folder: janus

…sions` locations

`guardian/setup-scala` has assumed that the `.tool-versions` file will always be in the current
working directory, but that's not always the case - eg: guardian/janus#4527

One option to get around that, I think, would be to set `working-directory:` when invoking
`guardian/setup-scala`:

https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#jobsjob_idstepsworking-directory

...but maybe allowing specific-configuration of where this _particular file_ is
located is more elegant or future-proof maybe?
@rtyley rtyley force-pushed the support-specifying-path-to-tool-versions branch from 80131e4 to 88fc937 Compare January 10, 2025 17:11
@rtyley rtyley requested a review from adamnfish January 10, 2025 17:14
@rtyley rtyley marked this pull request as ready for review January 10, 2025 17:14
@rtyley rtyley requested a review from a team as a code owner January 10, 2025 17:14
Copy link
Member

@davidfurey davidfurey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks reasonable to me as long as Adam still thinks this is useful

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants