Include tarballs of architecture-specific mist binaries in releases #181
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi @ninxsoft. I've got a PR here for your consideration. Let me know what you think. I'm happy to make changes if needed. Thanks!
Context
I'd like to be able to install the mist CLI using tools like mise and ubi. These tools — and others like them — generally expect release assets to include tarballs containing the binary, and often include architecture-specific versions.
What's changed?
This PR updates
draft_new_release.ymlto create tarballs of the arm64, x86_64, and universal versions of the CLI binary, and then include them as release assets.How to test
I've been able to test that compressing and decompressing the tarballs works as expected, but the rest of the changes are dependent on secrets in the main repository. If you think this PR is worth considering, you'll need to run the workflow yourself to test it.