ci: include compiled archives in snapshot build releases

[zimeg]

Summary

This PR uses a packaged CLI build in CI runs to match releases, using the -s and -W flags to omit debug info 🤖

Preview

The updated build is shown in the download size!

Before changes:

$ du dist/*
25276   dist/slack-macos_darwin_amd64_v1/bin
25248   dist/slack_linux_amd64_v1/bin
25592   dist/slack_windows_amd64_v1/bin

After changes:

$ du dist/*
17768   dist/slack-macos_darwin_amd64_v1/bin
17352   dist/slack_linux_amd64_v1/bin
17712   dist/slack_windows_amd64_v1/bin

Notes

A few comments were exploring other CI happenings that other PRs hope to address 🙏

Requirements

• I've read and understood the Contributing Guidelines and have done my best effort to follow them.
• I've read and agree to the Code of Conduct.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 62.78%. Comparing base (f2f33c4) to head (67bc246).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main       #6   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   62.78%   62.78%           
=======================================
  Files         210      210           
  Lines       22053    22053           
=======================================
  Hits        13846    13846           
- Misses       7128     7129    +1     
+ Partials     1079     1078    -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[zimeg]

📝 Leaving notes with findings in CI as findings happen!

[zimeg]

🏁 The describe command and --exclude patterns have become a puzzle to me...

I made a note of some strangeness in finding feature builds and am updating the CI to support the current tagging behavior we have elsewhere.

This might be interesting to revisit if feature builds start to make versions confusing IMO, but otherwise I want to check one more thing in this PR? 👾

[zimeg]

🎁 A perhaps excited change to the packing was found!

I'm going to retry the testing CI with these changes but without saved artifacts to mimic a dev-build best. Otherwise I'm hoping this is soon ready for review 🙏 ✨

[zimeg]

The -s and -w flag weren't being used when building the snapshot! I'm hoping this improves our runtime speeds around 👾

Before:

$ du dist/*
...
13324   dist/slack_cli_3.0.2-main-build-test-feature-6-gcc496f3_linux_64-bit.tar.gz
13332   dist/slack_cli_3.0.2-main-build-test-feature-6-gcc496f3_macOS_64-bit.tar.gz
14376   dist/slack_cli_3.0.2-main-build-test-feature-6-gcc496f3_windows_64-bit.zip

After:

$ du dist/*
...
7156    dist/slack_cli_3.0.2-main-build-test-feature-6-gcc496f3_linux_64-bit.tar.gz
7252    dist/slack_cli_3.0.2-main-build-test-feature-6-gcc496f3_macOS_64-bit.tar.gz
7208    dist/slack_cli_3.0.2-main-build-test-feature-6-gcc496f3_windows_64-bit.zip

[mwbrooks]

Great catch @zimeg! 👏🏻 Before this change, the export LDFLAGS was unused and instead it was using the LDFLAGS set by Makefile's startup.

[zimeg]

🗣️ I'm wanting to avoid more updates in this PR and am thinking this might have a fix for the dev-build breaking with previous feature builds, but am open to follow up and continued changes as needed! Marking this "ready for review"-

[mwbrooks]

✅ LGTM! Thanks for catching this oversight. 👏🏻

❓ In a previous commit, you also updated scripts/archive.sh with set -eo. Just curious why you decided to remove it from this PR?

[zimeg]

@mwbrooks And likewise, thank you for the review and catching that comment 👾 ✨

...updated scripts/archive.sh with set -eo...

That change was muddled with excluding feature tags from versions! With it, the archive.sh script would error and exit if a feature tag existed on main . Some feature tags were used in testing and this confirmed CI failed for these cases when exploring things 🫡

I'm meaning to move this into a separate PR since I believe it's a change that might need to be revisited or explored more!

For now though, I notice our dev-build has the expected assets without the mentioned tag strangeness! I'll merge this and will check back on these assets and follow up with the error PR.