On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 12:22, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > It looks like there is a general move to switch from Travis to GitHub > Actions. > AFAICT the following components are still using Travis: > > geometry > jelly > jxpath > math > numbers > rng > weaver > > Do we need to move these as well? >
In terms of supporting a CI build on all PRs for a range of platforms then the two provide the same functionality. I am not opposed to moving to GHA. It just did not seem necessary. One issue I have with GH actions is that when a build fails there is no option to scroll the build output log to the end to see the error. This is useful for maven's verbose output logs, especially with the multi-module projects (geometry, math, numbers, rng, statistics). Looking at a recent GH build you can search in the output log, but not scroll to the end. Maybe this is different if the build fails; I only looked at one that passed. The feature I liked from Travis was the integration of coverage reports from coveralls. This would red light a PR in the main page if coverage had dropped. There is no coveralls GHA. I installed the Codecov action for [Collections] as a test a few months ago and it has been sending coverage emails to our dev list since. You can click through and scroll the report. I do not think it red lights a PR for low coverage so you have to read the report. I am undecided if I prefer the report. No-one else seems to have commented either way. But I think it important that any PR has automated checks that the new code is executed. One thing I have noticed is that Travis is a bit flaky. Sometimes it does not run for PRs. We had a few spells on some projects where the Travis CI did not link up then magically started working again with no changes to settings. It's been a while since I looked at a PR using Travis and the coveralls reports. So I will open one now and see if the integration is still there. Having just opened one it does not log a Travis CI build in the GitHub page. LGTM analysis is running. Travis-ci.com does not pick up the PR. The last build was 6 days ago on master. [1] The settings are all good to build PRs. So this is an example of the flaky support we get from Travis. If nothing else this is a reason to change to GHA. Matt uses PRs a lot on geometry to check builds on multiple platforms. Perhaps he can feedback on whether the Travis integration is working there. > > BTW, emails from GHA runs can now be directed to project mailing > lists, which is great (*) > See: https://s.apache.org/asfyaml-gha > > Currently if I commit something that breaks a CI build on Travis (or Jenkins which we use for snapshot deployment) then I receive an e-mail. I am more likely to respond to personal e-mails than e-mails to a list. Can GHA target both types of mail? Alex [1] https://app.travis-ci.com/github/apache/commons-rng
