opened
nahuelwexd
username_0
I had no idea what to title, so I put that on.

This PR corrects some errors that caused the action not to work correctly. Also, it converts the action from being a Docker Action to being a Javascript Action, that way it is able to start a Docker container with the necessary permissions so that Flatpak can compile at full speed with fuse activated.

I took the liberty of making some modifications to the entrypoint.sh as well, to add the new proposals from the DevOps with Flatpak Initiative that is currently used in the GNOME apps on GitLab. As a side effect of this, this action will no longer clone the repository from the URL provided in the manifest, but will instead use the repo from which it is invoked. The idea is that this is also combined with a caching of the `.flatpak-builder/{git,downloads}` folders to prevent the CI from slowing down with unnecessary download tasks.

I am currently using a small copy that I made for my own project, and it works perfectly. This copy is distributed in:
- Docker image: https://github.com/username_0/flatpak-docker
- GitHub Action: https://github.com/username_0/flatpak-builder-action
- Project it is working on: https://github.com/username_0/unitube-gtk

Note: Another side effect of this change is that now you will be required to create specific Docker image tags for each of the platforms: FreeDesktop, GNOME, KDE, etc. since this will no longer download the runtimes from Flathub
DevOps Flatpak revolution
issue
created
bilelmoussaoui
username_1
Wow great job =) I will look into the rest of the code as soon as I can.
comment
created
bilelmoussaoui
username_1
Do you have any idea why the test build fails?
comment
created
nahuelwexd
username_0
The test build should now be in a full repository of an app, not here
comment
created
nahuelwexd
username_0
Well, I added a little project that should make the tests pass, but you need to update the Docker image or they will still failing
comment
created
bilelmoussaoui
username_1
Right, make sense. Thanks a lot! so we need to provide docker images for each runtime? :) that's a lot of images to maintain, I'm wondering if we should automate that using a github action too
comment
created
nahuelwexd
username_0
Yes, it also will avoid the need to download the runtimes every single time
comment
created
bilelmoussaoui
username_1
Makes sense, what I thought of is keeping the dockerfile's here and just use a github action to build and publish them. To make it easier to contribute to the action/images :)
comment