Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

`set-output` will be deprecated soon

See original GitHub issue

Describe the bug Recently we started seeing these warnings on github actions -

Warning: The `set-output` command is deprecated and will be disabled soon. Please upgrade to using Environment Files. For more information see: https://github.blog/changelog/2022-10-11-github-actions-deprecating-save-state-and-set-output-commands/

Looks like the action is internally using set-output command which will be disabled soon by github.

To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:

Run a workflow using ncipollo/release-action.

Expected behavior Warning should not be seen.

Additional context This action is really important for us and it is being used in an important workflow.

Issue Analytics

State:
Created a year ago
Reactions:2
Comments:11 (4 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

2reactions

ncipollocommented, Oct 14, 2022

I think setOutput is still the correct method to use, if you look closely at the implementation you will note that it writes to the new, correct location if GITHUB_OUTPUT exists in the environment. There real question here is why that variable doesn’t seem to exist for some folks.

I’m away from my computer from a few days but I suspect this variable may not be present if you aren’t correctly indicating that you want to use outputs from this step (or using them at all). If that’s the case I’ll add a check for that variable as well and avoid setting output if you don’t have them setup.

0reactions

Crono1981commented, Oct 20, 2022

Oh man, I believe I got it all wrong.

The warning is actually raised twice within the release job. GitHub will just mention the job, not the actual step that’s causing the warning, but the “twice” part should have clued me in that it might actually be the two actions/download-artifact@v3 steps that are causing this.

As it turns out, it is very, very much likely to be the case:

https://github.com/actions/download-artifact/issues/185

I’m so sorry, I shouldn’t have let myself dismiss that possibility just because that action belongs to one of GitHub’s very own (?) actions repositories. 🤦‍♂️