Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ci: move to travis #324

Merged
merged 22 commits into from
Feb 12, 2019
Merged

ci: move to travis #324

merged 22 commits into from
Feb 12, 2019

Conversation

hugomrdias
Copy link
Member

@hugomrdias hugomrdias commented Feb 6, 2019

This PR adds

  • travis ci as the default CI plus docs to enable it in other repos
  • commitlint cmd
  • dependency-check cmd
  • a lot more docs and examples to the cli interface ( some cmds still need more work but will leave that to another PR)
  • commitlint mode for travis
  • options forwarding improvements
  • removes old stuff jenkins related

@ghost ghost assigned hugomrdias Feb 6, 2019
@ghost ghost added the status/in-progress In progress label Feb 6, 2019
@hugomrdias
Copy link
Member Author

hugomrdias commented Feb 8, 2019

windows still fails in same runners because of the line endings issue.
i have a support ticket opened about it basically runners that ran without the .gitattributes don't convert line endings correctly after you added a the gitattributes files fixing it.

but you can see the branch run is green 🚀

@hugomrdias
Copy link
Member Author

This problem will most likely go away after the merge!

Do we really need the two runs that Travis does ? one for the branch and another for the PR (runs the tests on the merge commit between HEAD branch and target branch).
I think we only need the branch run because we always rebase or squash with master/whatever branch.

@daviddias
Copy link
Member

daviddias commented Feb 11, 2019

Do we really need the two runs that Travis does ? one for the branch and another for the PR (runs the tests on the merge commit between HEAD branch and target branch).

How to disable it?

Update: found it!

image

Update: now I remember why we need it. For external contributions.

@daviddias
Copy link
Member

What about the codecov drops?

@hugomrdias
Copy link
Member Author

What about the codecov drops?

it's on the travis.yml file no need to have more coverage stuff in aegir it self i'll probably add more docs on how to check coverage locally

@daviddias so we really need to have both builds active on travis? can we live with only PRs?

@daviddias
Copy link
Member

it's on the travis.yml file no need to have more coverage stuff in aegir it self i'll probably add more docs on how to check coverage locally

I didn’t understand this.

@daviddias so we really need to have both builds active on travis? can we live with only PRs?

Let’s paint that bike shed in another thread :) Open a issue on ipfs/js-core

@hugomrdias
Copy link
Member Author

hugomrdias commented Feb 11, 2019

we still have coverage and codecov service reporting it but only in the travis config, i removed the aegir coverage cmd because it didn't added much value.
We can just run npx nyc npm run test:node && npx nyc report locally or check the PR.

I'll improve the docs around this to be easier to understand.

Copy link
Member

@daviddias daviddias left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

squash and merge :)

@alanshaw
Copy link
Member

put it on a ⛵️

Copy link
Member

@vasco-santos vasco-santos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@hugomrdias hugomrdias merged commit 751641e into master Feb 12, 2019
@ghost ghost removed the status/in-progress In progress label Feb 12, 2019
@hugomrdias hugomrdias deleted the ci/travis branch February 12, 2019 12:06
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.

6 participants