Skip to content

Add deploy task support for DeployAt and DeployAtExpiry#354

Merged
wlthomson merged 3 commits intomainfrom
wlthomson/add-support-for-deploy-at-params
Apr 9, 2026
Merged

Add deploy task support for DeployAt and DeployAtExpiry#354
wlthomson merged 3 commits intomainfrom
wlthomson/add-support-for-deploy-at-params

Conversation

@wlthomson
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Adds DeployAt and DeployAtExpiry inputs to the Deploy Release task (Deploy V6 and V7).

Prior to the replacement of the .NET CLI with the Executions API deprecation in V6, users could pass --deployAt and --deployAtExpiry as raw command line parameters via the now deprecated AdditionalArguments input. When the CLI was swapped out for the TypeScript client, these were not ported to first-class inputs.

Both inputs are optional (surfaced under "Additional Options") and accept ISO 8601 date-time strings.

ado-scheduled-start-time-ado-task

@wlthomson
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Execution output snipped for a ADO pipeline with deployAt and deployAtExpiry parameters.

ado-scheduled-start-time-ado

Resulting deployment task in the Octopus Deploy UI, with matching scheduled deployment time. The orange icon indicates that the task failed to run within the expiration window specified by the user.

ado-scheduled-start-time-octopus

@wlthomson wlthomson requested review from a team and hnrkndrssn April 7, 2026 05:43
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@grace-rehn grace-rehn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Just a small question around error handling:
Would it be worth adding date format validation, or will an invalid format be caught server side? Just want to check its doesn't silently fail

@wlthomson
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

LGTM

Just a small question around error handling: Would it be worth adding date format validation, or will an invalid format be caught server side? Just want to check its doesn't silently fail

Fair point.

There's no user-facing validation per se, so it depends on what we consider an error state and what we mean by "fail". Currently, if the parameters can't be parsed as a datetime (while we prompt for ISO 8601 for consistency, any datetime format will technically work), they will be treated as null and ignored.

To save us from future support requests, I'll add some basic error handling if the user doesn't specify a valid date.

@wlthomson wlthomson merged commit 2f936fe into main Apr 9, 2026
9 checks passed
@wlthomson wlthomson deleted the wlthomson/add-support-for-deploy-at-params branch April 9, 2026 04:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants