Split this action into save-cache and restore-cache actions
See original GitHub issueProposal: Split this action into two, similar to actions/upload-artifact
/ actions/download-artifact
(also similar to what CircleCI does):
- actions/save-cache
- actions/restore-cache
Rationale: This will give the user a lot more control (e.g. I might want to save the cache even before running the test steps).
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 4 years ago
- Reactions:26
- Comments:20 (3 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
golangci-lint-action/run.ts at master - GitHub
Official GitHub action for golangci-lint from its authors ... import * as core from "@actions/core" ... import { restoreCache, saveCache } from "./cache"....
Read more >Using GitHub cache action with multiple cache paths?
I was able to make it work with a few modifications;. use relative paths instead of absolute; use a hash of the content...
Read more >What is a Harness Variable Expression? - Harness.io Docs
A split method is called with the argument ('\.'), and the result is a Java array, returning the first item, [0].
Read more >How to use the hasha.fromFileSync function in hasha - Snyk
fromFileSync examples, based on popular ways it is used in public projects. ... restoreCache, saveCache } = require('cache/lib/index') const fs ...
Read more >GitHub Actionsのキャッシュをより細かく制御する ... - ぽよメモ
GitHub Actionsのキャッシュにおいて、そのリストアと保存を別々に制御する機能が ... Split this action into save-cache and restore-cache actions ...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
If you fork this repo, you have just one upstream. If you’re writing complex pull request, you do it in one place. If you find bug which requires both loading and saving in specific order to reproduce, you report it in one place instead of guessing which one fits best or writing in both. If you want to use older version for any reason, you set one sha instead of two. And if you want to move to newer, but still not-so-fresh version, you just update that sha instead of tracking which changes in repository A will work with repository B.
That’s what we have now, with one repo.
I like the idea of controlling when exactly cache should be loaded/saved. But splitting repo for this is overkill. If that’s what’s needed to have more control (no idea honestly - not an actions writer yet, i stick to workflows for now), split load and save into two actions in separate folders which sounds like best of two worlds to me.
Why not add argument instead?