Revert "feat: luarocks support"

[sergii4]

Reverts #88

Failed run.

@mrcjkb could please take a look?

[mrcjkb]

Hey 👋

It's failing because the release-please workflow needs a github token.
I had set token: ${{ secrets.GH_TOKEN_FOR_UPDATES }}.

You can follow this guide to generate a token and add it to this repo's secrets, it should fix the error (note that the guide names it PAT instead of GH_TOKEN_FOR_UPDATES).

[sergii4]

@mrcjkb what about

Unexpected input(s) 'package-name', valid inputs are ['token', 'release-type',

[mrcjkb]

@mrcjkb what about

Unexpected input(s) 'package-name', valid inputs are ['token', 'release-type',

🤔 I suppose the package-name input is no longer used and can be removed.
But it's just a warning, it won't lead to a failure.

Edit: Yep, the package-name input was moved to a manifest file: https://github.com/google-github-actions/release-please-action?tab=readme-ov-file#package-options
But I don't think it's needed for luarocks packages.

[sergii4]

@mrcjkb I don't have an access to the repo settings
@akinsho @rcarriga could you please take a look?

[sergii4]

I will revert it so far

[rcarriga]

Just did this recently so copied what I did (I was using semantic-release in other repos) and then added a LUAROCKS_API_KEY for the neotest luarocks account #92

@sergii4 since you're maintainer of this repo, if you'd prefer a different approach, feel free to alter. The secret will be available for you to use anyway

[sergii4]

@rcarriga not sure if I have any option since I don't have access to the Settings section of the repo. Not sure how it's usually being granted

[rcarriga]

Sorry I mean you can edit the workflow if you'd like, the secret LUAROCKS_API_KEY will be available to use, you don't need to edit the secrets.

If you don't have any particular opinion on it, you can also just merge. I don't think there's any meaningful difference between semantic-release and release-please

[rcarriga]

Also looks like the tests are failing which will block releases with the current setup FYI