Replace heredoc with printenv - #2
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
I originally decided to close this pull request without merging, as none of the variants seemed valuable enough to me. However, I finally decided it was worth considering, and re-opened it. |
Member
|
Agreed, this looks better, thank you! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Continuation of #1 (comment)
I have experimented with several variants, but didn't quite like any of them:1
printenvfor bothINPUT_RUNandINPUT_ENVand moving the script header to the YAML.printenvfor bothINPUT_RUNandINPUT_ENV, but leaving the "heredoc" for the script header.teeinvocation, and maintaining the file path in one more place.printenvonly forINPUT_ENVbecause that "heredoc" was superflous.INPUT_RUNandINPUT_ENVFootnotes
Reminds me of XKCD 2408. ↩