We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Currently the action installs its dependencies at runtime:
vale-action/src/input.ts
Lines 54 to 58 in 3a4769d
Then it also installs Vale and Reviewdog in https://github.com/errata-ai/vale-action/blob/reviewdog/src/install.ts.
This makes the action slower than it needs to be and also causes issues like #111 and #128.
My suggestion would be to start using an image that contains all the required dependencies. https://docs.github.com/en/actions/sharing-automations/creating-actions/creating-a-docker-container-action describes this process. That's pretty much the opposite of 87aaef6. Sadly there's no PR attached to that commit with any explanation why this new strategy was used.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Vale and Reviewdog are runtime dependencies in so much as their versions are configurable.
Using Docker (even a pre-built image) for the other 2 is not faster.
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
Currently the action installs its dependencies at runtime:
vale-action/src/input.ts
Lines 54 to 58 in 3a4769d
Then it also installs Vale and Reviewdog in https://github.com/errata-ai/vale-action/blob/reviewdog/src/install.ts.
This makes the action slower than it needs to be and also causes issues like #111 and #128.
My suggestion would be to start using an image that contains all the required dependencies. https://docs.github.com/en/actions/sharing-automations/creating-actions/creating-a-docker-container-action describes this process. That's pretty much the opposite of 87aaef6. Sadly there's no PR attached to that commit with any explanation why this new strategy was used.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: