Closed jan-abel-inwt closed 6 months ago
It seems there are differences between the behavior of the action and the script we used before:
src/contrib
folder at the root of the repository.docs
directory, resulting in docs/src/contrib
.Do we need this extra docs folder, @wahani? What purpose does it serve?
Additionally, the action doesn't generate an archive using drat::archivePackages
. I believe it would be beneficial to include one.
If I remember correctly, the docs folder can be picked up by GH pages to serve the repo. Maybe that's why? I guess we have defined it slightly differently in our repo.
The source and previous versions all live in inwtlab, so getting one of those is simple. Also I think you still can't just install a particular version with install.packages, so in summary I don't believe we lose much if we don't archive.
If you feel like forking the action, I would also be fine with that. Or propose to implement those features upstream, maybe?
I see. I'm considering moving our drat repository from the docs
folder to a gh-pages
branch. This change aligns with the default settings in the drat functions and the drat action.
I also suggested the idea of using archivePackages to the author of the action, which I believe would be a more elegant solution.
For now i cleaned up the drat Repo manually and created the archive.
You can now specify to archive packages in the workflow file.
Additionally, I've made the following updates to the Drat repository mentioned in my previous post:
gh-pages
branch to the latest changes of main
gh-pages
branch as the default branch.docs
folder.To test all that, i redeployed shinyMatrix 0.8.0
to our drat via the updated workflow. This seems to work fine now.
We are currently not automatically deploying the R-package to the INWTlab drat repository. While there is a travis.yaml file present, indicating that Travis was previously utilized, I plan to transition the package deployment to a GitHub Actions workflow.