docs: suggest updated vercel-wait action for Atomic deploys (#1771)

This commit is contained in:
Luca D'Alessandro
2025-03-06 18:22:22 +01:00
committed by GitHub
parent 94fb532f5e
commit 3089caff0c
+8 -6
View File
@@ -127,9 +127,10 @@ jobs:
- name: Wait for vercel deployment (push)
id: wait-for-vercel
uses: ericallam/vercel-wait@main
uses: ludalex/vercel-wait@v1
with:
project-id: ${{ secrets.VERCEL_PROJECT_ID }}
team-id: ${{ secrets.VERCEL_SCOPE_NAME }}
token: ${{ secrets.VERCEL_TOKEN }}
sha: ${{ github.sha }}
@@ -145,12 +146,12 @@ jobs:
env:
VERCEL_DEPLOYMENT_ID: ${{ steps.wait-for-vercel.outputs.deployment-id }}
VERCEL_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.VERCEL_TOKEN }}
VERCEL_SCOPE_NAME: "<your team slug>"
VERCEL_SCOPE_NAME: ${{ secrets.VERCEL_SCOPE_NAME }}
```
This workflow does the following:
1. Waits for the Vercel deployment to complete using the `ericallam/vercel-wait` action.
1. Waits for the Vercel deployment to complete using the `ludalex/vercel-wait` action.
2. Deploys the tasks to Trigger.dev using the `npx trigger.dev deploy` command. There's no need to use the `--skip-promotion` flag because we want to promote the deployment.
3. Promotes the Vercel deployment using the `npx vercel promote` command.
@@ -164,8 +165,9 @@ For this workflow to work, you need to set up the following secrets in your GitH
Checkout our [example repo](https://github.com/ericallam/vercel-atomic-deploys) to see this workflow in action.
<Note>
We are using the `ericallam/vercel-wait` action above as a fork of the [official
We are using the `ludalex/vercel-wait` action above as a fork of the [official
tj-actions/vercel-wait](https://github.com/tj-actions/vercel-wait) action because there is a bug
in the official action that exits early if the deployment isn't found in the first check. I've
opened a PR for this issue [here](https://github.com/tj-actions/vercel-wait/pull/106).
in the official action that exits early if the deployment isn't found in the first check and due
to the fact that it supports treating skipped (cancelled) Vercel deployments as valid (on by default).
I've opened a PR for this issue [here](https://github.com/tj-actions/vercel-wait/pull/106).
</Note>