On 2016-11-16 04:09, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> On Nov 15, 2016, at 6:06 AM, rod <r...@pu-gh.com> wrote: >> >> (Apologies if this has been brought up before but I couldn't find a >> way to search the mailing list archives...) >> >> Travis CI has tight integration with Github for testing PRs, and >> may offer what you need... >> >> https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/osx-ci-environment/ >> https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/customizing-the-build > > We rejected Travis CI as unsuitable when we set up our Buildbot > system to build ports after commits to master. Why do you think the > same reasons for rejection would not apply to building ports after a > pull request?
I cannot remember previous discussion or its arguments, but Travis CI offers only recent versions of OS X and we have no control over the installation, such as which Xcode would be installed or when new versions are available. It also has time limits that would not work for all ports [1]. Therefore it is indeed not suitable to produce binary archives. However, as a quick check to see if a Portfile will work at all on at least some version of macOS, Travis CI should be sufficient for the majority of ports. Just running a 'port lint' check should even work for all. Rainer [1] https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/customizing-the-build/#Build-Timeouts
