What is missing
This is the only edition in the lecture-python-programming series without a Netlify PR preview. The English source, .fa and .fr all deploy one per pull request; this repository's ci.yml has no Netlify step, and gh api repos/.../actions/secrets returns no NETLIFY_SITE_ID here, where .fa and .fr both have one.
Why it matters here specifically
Translation review depends on reading rendered pages. A reviewer working through a sync PR in .fa or .fr can open the preview and see the lecture as a reader will; here they can only read the diff.
It has already cost us twice in the last day:
What is needed
Two halves, and the first is the blocker:
- A Netlify site for this repository, and its
NETLIFY_SITE_ID as a repo secret. NETLIFY_SITE_ID is per-site and set at repo level — .fa and .fr each carry their own — so it cannot be inherited from the org. This step needs someone with Netlify and repo-admin access.
- The workflow step in
ci.yml. Small, and copyable from a sibling.
One decision to make first
The series currently uses two different mechanisms, so this should follow whichever is intended as the standard rather than adding a third data point:
| Repo |
Mechanism |
| lecture-python-programming (source) |
nwtgck/actions-netlify@v4 |
.fa |
nwtgck/actions-netlify@v4 |
.fr |
quantecon/actions/preview-netlify@v0.8.0 |
.fr is the most recently set up of the three and uses the QuantEcon-maintained wrapper, which suggests that is the newer house pattern — but it is worth confirming rather than inferring from one data point. Note also that the .fr preview posts a PR comment rather than a commit status, so it does not appear in gh pr checks; whichever is chosen, that difference is worth knowing.
Happy to write the ci.yml half once the site and secret exist and the mechanism is settled.
What is missing
This is the only edition in the
lecture-python-programmingseries without a Netlify PR preview. The English source,.faand.frall deploy one per pull request; this repository'sci.ymlhas no Netlify step, andgh api repos/.../actions/secretsreturns noNETLIFY_SITE_IDhere, where.faand.frboth have one.Why it matters here specifically
Translation review depends on reading rendered pages. A reviewer working through a sync PR in
.faor.frcan open the preview and see the lecture as a reader will; here they can only read the diff.It has already cost us twice in the last day:
.faand.frcounterparts. Both of those were verified against a real deploy preview; this one could only be checked with a local build and a passing CI run.What is needed
Two halves, and the first is the blocker:
NETLIFY_SITE_IDas a repo secret.NETLIFY_SITE_IDis per-site and set at repo level —.faand.freach carry their own — so it cannot be inherited from the org. This step needs someone with Netlify and repo-admin access.ci.yml. Small, and copyable from a sibling.One decision to make first
The series currently uses two different mechanisms, so this should follow whichever is intended as the standard rather than adding a third data point:
nwtgck/actions-netlify@v4.fanwtgck/actions-netlify@v4.frquantecon/actions/preview-netlify@v0.8.0.fris the most recently set up of the three and uses the QuantEcon-maintained wrapper, which suggests that is the newer house pattern — but it is worth confirming rather than inferring from one data point. Note also that the.frpreview posts a PR comment rather than a commit status, so it does not appear ingh pr checks; whichever is chosen, that difference is worth knowing.Happy to write the
ci.ymlhalf once the site and secret exist and the mechanism is settled.