Skip to content

ci: Add Stork install option to GitHub Pages workflow #3452

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

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

joelsvensson
Copy link

@joelsvensson joelsvensson commented Mar 4, 2025

Summary

The current github workflow for building and deploying to github pages will fail if using pelican-search with stork
https://github.com/pelican-plugins/search

This PR will add an extra option for it to be installed on the github runner.

I choose to install via cargo as that is available on runner
https://github.com/actions/runner-images/blob/main/images/ubuntu/Ubuntu2404-Readme.md#installed-software
and is listed here https://stork-search.net/docs/install

However it takes about 1min for the runner to run this step. I guess the other ways are faster but this should be safe over time.

See this repo for tests with and without the var set
https://github.com/joelsvensson/joelsvensson.github.io/actions/workflows/build_and_deploy.yml

Pull Request Checklist

  • Ensured tests pass and (if applicable) updated functional test output
  • Conformed to code style guidelines by running appropriate linting tools
  • Added tests for changed code
  • Updated documentation for changed code

@joelsvensson joelsvensson requested a review from seanh as a code owner March 4, 2025 14:44
@justinmayer justinmayer changed the title GitHub workflow stork install option ci: Add Stork install option to GitHub Pages workflow Mar 25, 2025
Copy link
Member

@justinmayer justinmayer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Other than a few minor comments mostly related to capitalizing "Stork", this seems good to me.

@seanh: Any thoughts about this?

@justinmayer
Copy link
Member

I resolved the unrelated test failures in a separate PR, so those can be ignored.

@seanh: Any thoughts on this?

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