Hi David, Thanks for working on this. Overall, I am supportive. I have two questions/comments.
1. I wonder if we should discuss with the infra team in order to ensure that they have enough capacity for us to use the action runners. Our CI is pretty greedy in general. We could also discuss with them whether they could move the capacity that we used in Jenkins to the runners. I think that Kafka was one of the most, if not the most, heavy users of the shared Jenkins infra. I think that they will appreciate the heads up. 2. Would it be possible to improve how failed tests are reported? For instance, the tests in your PR failed with `1448 tests completed, 2 failed`. First it is quite hard to see it because the logs are long. Second it is almost impossible to find those two failed tests. In my opinion, we can not use it in the current state to merge pull requests. Do you know if there are ways to improve this? Best, David On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 2:44 PM 黃竣陽 <s7133...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello David, > > I find the Jenkins UI to be quite unfriendly for developers, and the > Apache Jenkins instance is often unreliable. > On the other hand, the new GitHub Actions UI is much more appealing to me. > If GitHub Actions proves to be more > stable than Jenkins, I believe it would be a worthwhile change to switch > to GitHub Actions. > > Thank you. > > Best Regards, > Jiunn Yang > > Josep Prat <josep.p...@aiven.io.INVALID> 於 2024年8月16日 下午4:57 寫道： > > > > Hi David, > > One of the enhancements we can have with this change (it's easier to do > > with GH actions) is to write back the result of the CI run as a comment > on > > the PR itself. I believe not needing to periodically check CI to see if > the > > run finished would be a great win. By having CI commenting on the PR > > everyone watching the PR (author and reviewers) will get notified when > it's > > done. > >
