-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 224
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
Breaking change in patch version 3.1.5 #1230
Comments
+1, our GHES instance is not using the latest version and can't make use of a GHA runner that fully supports Node 20. We're manually pinning to 3.1.4 in our workflows now to avoid this unexpected change. We'd really like to see a 3.1.6 pushed that reverts this unexpected dependency change, and instead roll the Node 20 version update into the v4 beta alongside the other breaking changes you're planning. Other GitHub Actions that we use from other vendors generally chose a major version bump when updating the required NodeJS version which prevented unexpected issues. We've generally trained our engineers to use |
@eashwar @cliffchapmanrbx apologies, this was done as node16 was being deprecated. I will push out a fix in the next hour to revert the change and move to |
This has been remedied in |
That's exactly what we were hoping for, thank you for addressing it quickly! We'll keep pressing on with our GHA runner upgrade process :) |
When can we expect a |
@sebastianbergmann in about an hour! |
Hi all, the change from 3.1.4 to 3.1.5 updates the runtime of the action to Node.js 20.
This is a breaking change for runners that do not support node 20 but are using
@v3
as the tag for the action.Tooling at my company was broken since we use
@v3
but are still in progress rolling out node 20 support for our self-hosted runners -- thus, our core CI pipeline started to fail with the release of 3.1.5.A breaking change to the runtime of a reusable GHA workflow should be semantically versioned as a new major version, not a new patch version like it was. Can we either rollback this change and re-roll it out as a 4.0 change, or at least moving forward make sure we properly respect semantic versioning?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: