It was left out since it adds significant additional complexity and the
value is dubious at best for PRs that aren't merged shortly after the
build has finished.
On 25/03/2020 10:28, Dian Fu wrote:
Thanks for the information. I'm sorry that I'm not aware of this before and I
have checked the build log of travis and confirmed that this is true.
@Chesnay Are there any specific reasons for this and is it possible to add this
back for Azure Pipelines?
Thanks,
Dian
在 2020年3月25日，下午4:43，Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> 写道：
@Dian we haven't been rebasing PR's against master for months, ever since we
switched to CiBot.
On 25/03/2020 09:29, Dian Fu wrote:
Hi Robert,
Thanks a lot for your great work!
Overall I'm +1 to switch to Azure as the primary CI tool if it's stable enough
as I think there is no need to run both the travis and Azure for one single PR.
However, there are still some improvements need to do and it would be great if
these issues could be addressed before fully switch to Azure:
- The report of Azure is still not viewable[1] (I noticed that Hequn has also
reported this issue in another thread). This is very useful information.
- For PR test of Azure pipeline, it seems that it will not rebase the master
code before running the tests.
Thanks,
Dian
[1]
https://dev.azure.com/rmetzger/web/build.aspx?pcguid=03e2a4fd-f647-46c5-a324-527d2c2984ce&builduri=vstfs%3a%2f%2f%2fBuild%2fBuild%2f6593&tracking_data=eyJTb3VyY2UiOiJFbWFpbCIsIlR5cGUiOiJOb3RpZmljYXRpb24iLCJTSUQiOiIzMzk0MzciLCJTVHlwZSI6IkdSUCIsIlJlY2lwIjoxLCJfeGNpIjp7Ik5JRCI6NDAyODQ3NzksIk1SZWNpcCI6Im0wPTEgIiwiQWN0IjoiMTNjNDc3YWMtZTBjYS00MjJkLTkxOTItZWI0NzFkZmUzMWY0In0sIkVsZW1lbnQiOiJoZXJvL2N0YSJ9
<https://dev.azure.com/rmetzger/web/build.aspx?pcguid=03e2a4fd-f647-46c5-a324-527d2c2984ce&builduri=vstfs%3a%2f%2f%2fBuild%2fBuild%2f6593&tracking_data=eyJTb3VyY2UiOiJFbWFpbCIsIlR5cGUiOiJOb3RpZmljYXRpb24iLCJTSUQiOiIzMzk0MzciLCJTVHlwZSI6IkdSUCIsIlJlY2lwIjoxLCJfeGNpIjp7Ik5JRCI6NDAyODQ3NzksIk1SZWNpcCI6Im0wPTEgIiwiQWN0IjoiMTNjNDc3YWMtZTBjYS00MjJkLTkxOTItZWI0NzFkZmUzMWY0In0sIkVsZW1lbnQiOiJoZXJvL2N0YSJ9>
<https://dev.azure.com/rmetzger/web/build.aspx?pcguid=03e2a4fd-f647-46c5-a324-527d2c2984ce&builduri=vstfs:///Build/Build/6593&tracking_data=eyJTb3VyY2UiOiJFbWFpbCIsIlR5cGUiOiJOb3RpZmljYXRpb24iLCJTSUQiOiIzMzk0MzciLCJTVHlwZSI6IkdSUCIsIlJlY2lwIjoxLCJfeGNpIjp7Ik5JRCI6NDAyODQ3NzksIk1SZWNpcCI6Im0wPTEgIiwiQWN0IjoiMTNjNDc3YWMtZTBjYS00MjJkLTkxOTItZWI0NzFkZmUzMWY0In0sIkVsZW1lbnQiOiJoZXJvL2N0YSJ9
<https://dev.azure.com/rmetzger/web/build.aspx?pcguid=03e2a4fd-f647-46c5-a324-527d2c2984ce&builduri=vstfs:///Build/Build/6593&tracking_data=eyJTb3VyY2UiOiJFbWFpbCIsIlR5cGUiOiJOb3RpZmljYXRpb24iLCJTSUQiOiIzMzk0MzciLCJTVHlwZSI6IkdSUCIsIlJlY2lwIjoxLCJfeGNpIjp7Ik5JRCI6NDAyODQ3NzksIk1SZWNpcCI6Im0wPTEgIiwiQWN0IjoiMTNjNDc3YWMtZTBjYS00MjJkLTkxOTItZWI0NzFkZmUzMWY0In0sIkVsZW1lbnQiOiJoZXJvL2N0YSJ9>>
在 2020年3月25日，下午3:33，Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> 写道：
Some thoughts:
- by virtue of maintaining the past 2 releases we will have to maintain any
Travis infrastructure as long as 1.10 is supported, i.e., until 1.12
- the azure setup doesn't appear to be equivalent yet since the java e2e
profile isn't setting the hadoop switch (-Pe2e-hadoop), as a result of which
SQLClientKafkaITCase isn't run
- the nightly scripts still seems to be using a maven version other than 3.2.5;
from today on master:
2020-03-25T05:31:52.7412964Z [INFO] --------<
org.apache.flink:flink-end-to-end-tests-common-kafka >--------
2020-03-25T05:31:52.7413854Z [INFO] Building
flink-end-to-end-tests-common-kafka 1.11-SNAPSHOT [39/46]
2020-03-25T05:31:52.7414689Z [INFO] --------------------------------[ jar
]---------------------------------
2020-03-25T05:31:52.7518360Z [INFO]
2020-03-25T05:31:52.7519770Z [INFO] --- maven-checkstyle-plugin:2.17:check
(validate) @ flink-end-to-end-tests-common-kafka ---
- there is no real benefit in retiring the travis support in CiBot; the
important part is whether Travis is run or not for pull requests.
From what I can tell though azure seems to be working fine for pull requests,
so +1 to at least disable the travis PR runs.
On 23/03/2020 14:48, Robert Metzger wrote:
Hey devs,
I would like to discuss whether it makes sense to fully switch to Azure
Pipelines and phase out our Travis integration.
More information on our Azure integration can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2020/03/22/Migrating+Flink%27s+CI+Infrastructure+from+Travis+CI+to+Azure+Pipelines
Travis will stay for the release-1.10 and older branches, as I have set up
Azure only for the master branch.
Proposal:
- We keep the flinkbot infrastructure supporting both Travis and Azure
around, while we are still receive pull requests and pushes for the
"master" and "release-1.10" branches.
- We remove the travis-specific files from "master", so that builds are not
triggered anymore
- once we receive no more builds at Travis (because 1.11 has been
released), we remove the remaining travis-related infrastructure
What do you think?
Best,
Robert
