4 ms·
Publishing a Docker Container for MS Edit to the GitHub Container Registry
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- piskov 1y agoThe lengths people go to not use Vim :-)
- brudgers 1y agoBecause evil-mode, less far than for avoiding Emacs.
- bluedino 1y agoI thought this would let you run some version of edit.com
- esafak 1y agoIs it possible to clone a Github repo and keep the clone in sync automatically, if you don't own the source? If so, you could create a Github Action to publish images as updates are released. edit: I see suggestions to poll the source. That works, but I was hoping to use a hook to avoid that.
- OptionOfT 1y agoYou fork the repo which has a GitHub action that builds the container & publishes it, or if it doesn't, you add it to your fork. And then you create an action on a schedule [0] which checks upstream for updates, and syncs it to your fork. Mind you that that sync needs to be done with a PAT [1], otherwise that sync (push) will not trigger a new build. [0] https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/choosing-when-your-workflow-runs/events-that-trigger-workflows#schedule https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/choosin... [1] https://docs.github.com/en/actions/security-for-github-actions/security-guides/automatic-token-authentication https://docs.github.com/en/actions/security-for-github-actio... > When you use the repository's GITHUB_TOKEN to perform tasks, events triggered by the GITHUB_TOKEN, with the exception of workflow_dispatch and repository_dispatch, will not create a new workflow run. This prevents you from accidentally creating recursive workflow runs. For example, if a workflow run pushes code using the repository's GITHUB_TOKEN, a new workflow will not run even when the repository contains a workflow configured to run when push events occur.
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y agoThe structure I've done is that my repo only contains my build script, and has a scheduled CI job that checks upstream for changes (and builds as needed)
- esbeeb 1y agoMS Edit in the house! /s
- mieses 1y agoThis is stupid. You are supposed to wait 2 more decades and acquire nano for 26.2 billion dollars once it's as big as Linkedin.