0

I came across this question about a GitHub action in a monorepo and it was tagged with and . Because it involves GitHub actions, it naturally involves CI but not necessarily CD.

If a question is tagged with but doesn't discuss CD, should it be retagged with ?

I guess this should also raise the complementary question of whether without CI should be retagged with or .

0

I'd say the real question is: shoudl be burninated as it is a meta tag encompassing the two others.

Now in term of usage, peoples are more likely to tags things with and I assume watcher of these 3 tags overlap at nearly 100%, so in term of user-friendlyness, I'd let it as is and don't removed tags overzealously unless they are totally unrelated.

I was on the fence about rejecting your edit, removing the where the problem is specifically aroung committing within github action is kind of harming the question. Adding monorepo is debatable but does no harm, adding github-action is a great addition.

Back to in this case the problem is around preparing the deployment files for kubernetes, so it is absolutely about conitnuous devivery, the fact the author didn't expose its deploy job coming later doesn't mean there's none.

So at the end of the day, I'd avoid removing this tag unless the question is neither about CI or CD.

2
  • I think you're looking at it the wrong way. With a question that could have so many different tags, you have to be objective about it. Git is not discussed in any way within the question; same for continuous delivery. There are other tags that fit the question far better than those anyway. Either continuous-integration and continuous-delivery should merge into cicd or there should be no overlap. – Adam Feb 19 at 16:17
  • 1
    This beg the question of what the tags are for in your point of view, I think we have a far different approach to them. Check your own question here on meta, retagging implies tags, that overlaps.And seriously, if "and push changed files to another branch/repo" is not about git I don't know what it is. The whole question is about keeping the file history in git when doing a push... (and the solution is to not force push). – Tensibai Feb 19 at 23:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .