Skip to content

Comments

Chore/migrate to gh actions from circleci 2 [QA]#201

Open
AnnaFYZ wants to merge 2 commits intoqafrom
chore/migrate-to-gh-actions-from-circleci-2
Open

Chore/migrate to gh actions from circleci 2 [QA]#201
AnnaFYZ wants to merge 2 commits intoqafrom
chore/migrate-to-gh-actions-from-circleci-2

Conversation

@AnnaFYZ
Copy link
Contributor

@AnnaFYZ AnnaFYZ commented Feb 23, 2026

This is a:

  • New feature - new behaviour has been implemented
  • 🐛 Bug fix - existing behaviour has been made to behave
  • ♻️ Refactor - the behaviour has not changed, just the implementation
  • Test backfill - tests for existing behaviour were added but the behaviour itself hasn't changed
  • ⚙️ Chore - maintenance task, behaviour and implementation haven't changed

Description

replacing circleCi yml with github workflows

  • Purpose -

Migrate to Github actions from CircleCI because we don't need CircleCI
Use IAM role than IAM user

  • How to check - Before merging this PR, we can only check the test job (on CI.yml).
    It’s only after the PR is merged that we can check if the qa job (on CI.yml) and build-and-deploy (on deploy.yml) works.

Links

Author checklist

  • I have written a title that reflects the relevant ticket
  • I have written a description that says what the PR does and how to validate it
  • I have linked to the project board ticket (and any related PRs/issues) in the Links section
  • I have added a link to this PR to the ticket
  • I have made the PR to qa from a branch named <category>/<name>, e.g. feature/edit-spaceships or bugfix/restore-oxygen
  • I have completed the manual tests described here
  • I have requested reviewers here and in my team chat channel
  • I have spoken with my PM or TL about any parts of this task that may have become out-of-scope, or any additional improvements that I now realise may benefit my project
  • I have added tests, or new tests were not required
  • I have updated any documentation (e.g. diagrams, schemas), or documentation updates were not required

@susanssky susanssky requested a review from a team February 23, 2026 10:35
@susanssky
Copy link

Although I have approved but I have called @pedroguima to grant the admin privilege to the devops team otherwise i can't unlock circleci-check on the branch

@textbook
Copy link
Member

These are @susanssky's own changes from #199, right? So surely someone else should be reviewing them, otherwise we're achieving none of the goals of code review.

@AnnaFYZ
Copy link
Contributor Author

AnnaFYZ commented Feb 23, 2026

These are @susanssky's own changes from #199, right? So surely someone else should be reviewing them, otherwise we're achieving none of the goals of code review.

of course. we agreed that dev/ops team will review as we need minimum two reviewers anyway

Copy link

@Agnes4Him Agnes4Him Feb 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wondering if details such as bucket, distribution, region, role, and url can be saved as variables and then referenced in the pipeline that way instead of directly.

Copy link

@susanssky susanssky Feb 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wondering if details such as bucket, distribution, region, role, and url can be saved as variables and then referenced in the pipeline that way instead of directly.

Honestly, if I’m the person updating the workflow, I really don’t want to see var.SUBDOMAIN every time and then have to click on Settings → Environment variables manually just to check the real value.
Also, the DevOps team doesn’t have admin rights in the forms repo or the application process repo.(I have called Pedro about it)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, then.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

Status: 👀 In review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants