Remove CI_SERVER_PORT from example
What does this MR do?
This MR removes the CI_SERVER_PORT
CI/CD variable from the publish-npm
example job.
If this variable is included, the npm publish
command actually fails with the following error:
$ npm publish --verbose
.....
.....
npm verb stack Error: This command requires you to be logged in to https://gitlab.com:443/api/v4/projects/51546341/packages/npm/
npm verb stack at Publish.exec (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/npm/lib/commands/publish.js:110:29)
npm verb stack at async module.exports (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/npm/lib/cli-entry.js:61:5)
npm verb cwd /builds/anton/npmtest
npm verb Linux 5.4.109+
npm verb node v21.0.0
npm verb npm v10.2.0
npm ERR! code ENEEDAUTH
npm ERR! need auth This command requires you to be logged in to https://gitlab.com:443/api/v4/projects/51546341/packages/npm/
npm ERR! need auth You need to authorize this machine using `npm adduser`
npm verb exit 1
npm verb code 1
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in: /root/.npm/_logs/2023-10-24T23_54_14_630Z-debug-0.log
See examples of this:
- Working pipeline (removed
CI_SERVER_PORT
): Pipeline / .gitlab-ci.yml - Broken pipeline (included
CI_SERVER_PORT
): Pipeline / .gitlab-ci.yml
The corresponding package.json
file:
{
"name": "@anton/npmtest",
"version": "1.0.0",
"description": "A smoke test for the GitLab NPM Registry",
"main": "index.js"
}
Do note that the project used for testing was originally private, but I have made it public so the links above can be viewed.
Related issues
Author's checklist
-
Optional. Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course. -
Follow the: -
If you're adding or changing the main heading of the page (H1), ensure that the product tier badge is added. -
If you are a GitLab team member, request a review based on: - The documentation page's metadata.
- The associated Technical Writer.
If you are a GitLab team member and only adding documentation, do not add any of the following labels:
~"frontend"
~"backend"
~"type::bug"
~"database"
These labels cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.
Reviewer's checklist
Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.
If you aren't sure which tech writer to ask, use roulette or ask in the #docs Slack channel.
-
If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert. - Technical writer review items:
-
Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date. -
Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR. -
Ensure a release milestone is set. - If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
-
The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior
, say something likeDefault behavior when you close an issue
. -
The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK
, say something likeConfigure GDK
. -
Any task steps should be written as a numbered list. - If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
-
-
-
Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the reviews above. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.