On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 5:47 AM Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 2:45 PM Aaron Conole <acon...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for working on this. Sadly, I think we will have to abandon > > > Travis soon - given the new changes it is looking very awful. Robot > > > already is starved for job time. > I am looking at [1], is DPDK not considered as open source project? > > [1] https://blog.travis-ci.com/oss-announcement
Ilya (@OVS) contacted the Travis support. The reply is that a project that has sponsored contributors can not ask for free tokens on Travis CI. I personally did not try to contact their support given this response. > > > Since we don't have ARM test runs, I guess we will have to rely on > > > something else for that coverage now, but I like that there is > > > coverage included at least to compile. > > > > For ARM test runs, UNH is a good candidate but nothing prevents other ARM > > based CI from being added. > Is it possible to keep Travis CI for Arm? For individuals, the 10k credits with the current DPDK jobs get burned in something like 4 runs (read: 4 runs a month). Even if we narrow the configuration to only ARM, this will at best give us x3, so let's say 12 runs a month. Now consider the ovsrobot and the number of series that hit the list on a worst^Wbest day like a week before rc1. > > > I will need to update the robot to pull information from github > > > actions, so for now it will need to be manually checked (but here's an > > > example of a run: > > > https://github.com/ovsrobot/dpdk/actions/runs/382073265). What's nice is > > the robot is already primed to run the jobs, so that's good. > Is there any guarantee that GitHub actions will be free forever? There is no "forever". At least, UNH lab which the project sponsors seems viable on the mid/long term. -- David Marchand
