ci: uci/copy-templates

[web3-bot]

This PR was created automatically by the @web3-bot as a part of the Unified CI project.

Closes #282

[codecov-commenter]

Welcome to Codecov 🎉

Once you merge this PR into your default branch, you're all set! Codecov will compare coverage reports and display results in all future pull requests.

Thanks for integrating Codecov - We've got you covered ☂️

[rvagg]

#284 deals with some of this

[laurentsenta]

Double checking make gen check: failed job

[laurentsenta]

Thanks for sharing the patch, @rvagg. I rebased on top of your work,

We'll skip testing for race conditions for now,

Do you care about testing on Windows and macOS?

They come for free with UCI, but it's a bit noisier to have four more CI checks, and Windows testing seems much slower (6+ minutes here).

[rvagg]

Do you care about testing on Windows and macOS?

macOS yes, Windows not so much, we can skip for now I think

[galargh]

Shall we deprecate CircleCI in one Go? I believe we do have feature parity so I think we're good to go.

[rvagg]

I think we should hold off on this until we have v0.14 squared away unfortunately. There's a lot of churn in here and the go.mod version bump is not ideal to push through while we're doing RCs.

But otherwise I'm excited to get this landed.

[BigLep]

I think we should hold off on this until we have v0.14 squared away unfortunately. There's a lot of churn in here and the go.mod version bump is not ideal to push through while we're doing RCs.

@rvagg : when are you thinking we could pick this up? Once we have a final-for-mainnet release for Lotus (v1.28.0)?

I'm not saying you're wrong, but what is the biggest risk you're seeing here? I thought this PR was just automating a lot of the steps that we do manually (and without review) in the GitHub UI. Is the worst case that we publish a botched version? Wouldn't we only update Lotus to depend on it when we have a good version?

[rvagg]

@BigLep it's not a big deal, but go.mod bumps from 1.18 to 1.21. So a breaking change. There's also a lot of other fixes in here that add churn. But then again .. holding this off would make it a breaking change and would make patch releases harder post v14! So perhaps we should just bundle it all in, like I'm advocating for the BatchReturn change.

[BigLep]

@laurentsenta: @rvagg has verbally approved this. He was holding off approval in the tool because of uncertainty on whether to merge this into master now given the ongoing Network release/upgrade. We talked this through and he's good with this change.

Also, this effectively closes #275 as well right?

[rvagg]

Yes, good to go, I ran this on top of master and #288 on top of this during the calibnet upgrade to give us an additional level of assurance of what we think is likely to be a v14 final.

[galargh]

Merged, updated required checks and stopped building in Circle CI ✅