Skip to content
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

Switch over to riff-raff deploys #1720

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Switch over to riff-raff deploys #1720

wants to merge 7 commits into from

Conversation

Jakeii
Copy link
Member

@Jakeii Jakeii commented Jan 3, 2025

What does this change?

The riff-raff deploys introduced in #1693 are working great, we are switching to it for 100%.

This PR:

  • Updates the readme
  • Go back to one prod webpack config
  • Add more docs on how the deployments work
  • Adds PRout for notifying on PRs when changes are live
  • Move custom webpack plugins to their own files in webpack

Why?

Developer Experience

Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Jan 3, 2025

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 133ee8d

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jan 8, 2025

Ad load time test results

For consented, top-above-nav took on average 4179ms to load.
For consentless, top-above-nav took on average 2820ms to load.

Test conditions:

  • 5mbps download speed
  • 1.5mbps upload speed
  • 150ms latency

@Jakeii Jakeii changed the title Add PRout for riff-raff deploys Switch over to riff-raff deploys Jan 13, 2025
@Jakeii Jakeii marked this pull request as ready for review January 13, 2025 14:48
@Jakeii Jakeii requested a review from a team as a code owner January 13, 2025 14:48
Copy link

@cemms1 cemms1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fantastic documentation 👏

I think possibly in an ideal world, the PRout part would be done in a separate PR. I only say that as it's not always the most straightforward thing to set up and you wouldn't want to revert the other changes if purely the PRout part wasn't working as expected?

I'm also curious why we are going with Cloudformation directly rather than using CDK? Here's an example of a parameter being saved as part of a CDK stack https://github.com/guardian/dotcom-rendering/blob/a6ca5dd61262ef3d11bb27ae2f20dc3d654ded65/dotcom-rendering/cdk/lib/renderingStack.ts#L286-L291

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/deployment/readme.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a reason we're using Cloudformation rather than CDK here?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it's to avoid the overhead of maintaining a bunch of CDK and it's dependencies, as it's just a couple of parameters in ssm, this seemed nicer, if it were any more complicated CDK would definitely be the better shout!

{
"checkpoints": {
"PROD": {
"url": "https://assets-code.guim.co.uk/commercial/prout",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh this points to code btw!

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you! 🙈

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