Skip to content

Conversation

dbackeus
Copy link

Potential fix for: #268

This implementation seems simpler than preventing existing ENV variables from being sourced in the first place.

Not sure if we should apply the same logic to the other .env file variants as well?

Potential fix for: #268

This implementation seems simpler than preventing existing ENV variables from being sourced in the first place.

Not sure if we should apply the same logic to the other .env file variants as well?
@dbackeus
Copy link
Author

Regarding the CI failures, I guess I don't have access to see the logs of those checks. I just see a generic "check failed" message when clicking the Details link.

@nonrational
Copy link
Member

I just see a generic "check failed" message when clicking the Details link.

Me too. Will restart the jobs.

@dbackeus
Copy link
Author

And now we have a different set of failures 😬

@nonrational
Copy link
Member

Not sure if we should apply the same logic to the other .env file variants as well?

yeah, if we're going to do it for one, we should probably do it for all.

@nonrational
Copy link
Member

I think there's just something funky with GitHub's Big Sur environment...

@nonrational
Copy link
Member

Closing in favor of #275

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants