Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Moving tag/branch #133

New issue

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

Closed
LecrisUT opened this issue May 15, 2025 · 9 comments
Closed

Moving tag/branch #133

LecrisUT opened this issue May 15, 2025 · 9 comments
Labels
wontfix This will not be worked on

Comments

@LecrisUT
Copy link

Common github actions design is to have a branch or moving tag with v1 or v0 to minimize downstream's maintenance. Could you add such design.

@matthewfeickert
Copy link
Member

matthewfeickert commented May 15, 2025

This is something we're explicitly not trying to do given the nature of the security release. We recommend in SPEC 8 that people use Dependabot for GitHub actions to keep things updated. c.f. the README too.

Updates to the action itself are infrequent by design.

I'm in transit and on my phone so the response is very short, but if there are additional questions we can definitely discuss more. 👍

@tupui
Copy link
Member

tupui commented May 15, 2025

Yes that's the point of using hashes and pointing to specific versions. It's not convenient yes, but the other option is not secure.

@tupui tupui closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale May 15, 2025
@LecrisUT
Copy link
Author

Fair. PyPI release action uses moving tags, but I guess that is technically more secure due to the OAuth tokens/trusted-publishers used.

Regarding dependabot, it would be good to also point to a renovatebot configuration. dependabot is a very noisy solution which does miss updates due to the 5 PR limit.

@bsipocz
Copy link
Member

bsipocz commented May 15, 2025

Monthly dependabot is still noisy, but usually is an acceptable compromise.

@matthewfeickert
Copy link
Member

dependabot is a very noisy solution which does miss updates due to the 5 PR limit.

I do not think it is asking too much to merge a PR once every 5 months.

@matthewfeickert
Copy link
Member

matthewfeickert commented May 15, 2025

It is fair to ask for other tools though! I don't have experience with renovate but if you can point to examples we can look at if that's something that integrates into the security model. (Seems like probably yes from the very little I do know about it.)

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Author

dependabot is a very noisy solution which does miss updates due to the 5 PR limit.

I do not think it is asking too much to merge a PR once every 5 months.

It's a different issue. Dependabot, by default, can only have 5 open PRs, after which any updates will be missed. Other brilliant design choices they've made is that whenever there is an update, instead of rebasing an old PR, they simply close and open a new PR, resulting in inactive projects with thousands of PRs.

It is fair to ask for other tools though! I don't have experience with renovate but if you can point to examples we can look at if that's something that integrates into the security model.

Unfortunately the documentation for renovatebot is quite opaque. Afaiu, the default should pick up on all providers including GH actions

{
  "extends": ["config:recommended"]
}

I believe that for the model here, you want to include "helpers:pinGitHubActionDigests", but it should probably be limited to a specific package match for this action.

If you have a setup, you can then make it shareable via

{
  "extends": ["github>scientific-python/upload-nightly-action"]
}

@bsipocz
Copy link
Member

bsipocz commented May 16, 2025

You can group the dependabot updates into one pr, doing that and opting for monthly you practically will never reach the 5 limit.

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Author

You can group the dependabot updates into one pr, doing that and opting for monthly you practically will never reach the 5 limit.

Yeah, I've played around with that when they first released it. It still didn't rebase PRs, so it was still incredibly noisy.

@bsipocz bsipocz added the wontfix This will not be worked on label May 16, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
wontfix This will not be worked on
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants