Thank you for the feedback so far.
Responses to the items Chesnay raised:
- 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
Okay. I wasn't sure about the exact policy there.
- 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
I filed a ticket to address this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-16778
- 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 ---
I'm planning to address this as part of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-16411, where I work on
centralizing all mvn invocations.
- 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.
So we disable Travis for https://github.com/flink-ci/flink ? I will do it
once there are no new concerns and above tickets are resolved.
What about disabling travis for master pushes? (e.g. removing the
.travis.yml file from master)?
@Dian:
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
- 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.
You are referring to the emails send to builds@f.a.o right?
I have reported this both as a bug [1] and a feature request [2] to Azure.
But I don't believe they will resolve this issue anytime soon.
Azure has an notifications API that we could use to build a service that
sends emails to that list, but I feel that this is really a waste of time.
The URL in the link even contains the ID of the build. We would just need
to extract this ID and generate the appropriate URL. I will try to directly
reach the product management of AZP, maybe I can get some attention from
there.
[1]
https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/content/problem/957778/third-parties-are-unable-to-access-notification-li.html?childToView=960403#comment-960403
[2]
https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/content/idea/960472/third-parties-are-unable-to-access-notification-li-1.html
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 10:34 AM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
wrote:
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
