Re: [DISCUSS] TravisCI auto cancellation

I agree, it's useful for pull requests, but in the master it easily leads to multiple commits in a row not being tests. Most recent builds are marked as failed because they were canceled... On 07.06.2017 18:41, Robert Metzger wrote: I think auto cancellation is also enabled for branch builds.

Re: [DISCUSS] TravisCI auto cancellation

I think auto cancellation is also enabled for branch builds. I think this is pretty bad to find out which commit introduced a build instability. I'll contact INFRA to check this again. On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Greg Hogan wrote: > Wow, that was a quick response that this feature was alre

Re: [DISCUSS] TravisCI auto cancellation

Wow, that was a quick response that this feature was already enabled. > On Mar 29, 2017, at 9:31 AM, Greg Hogan wrote: > > Ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13778 > > > >> On Mar 29, 2017, at 4:07 AM, Till Rohrmann >

Re: [DISCUSS] TravisCI auto cancellation

Ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13778 > On Mar 29, 2017, at 4:07 AM, Till Rohrmann wrote: > > Looking at Flink's Travis account, I've got the feeling that this feature > has already been activated. At least I see some buil

Re: [DISCUSS] TravisCI auto cancellation

Looking at Flink's Travis account, I've got the feeling that this feature has already been activated. At least I see some builds (e.g. PR #3625) where multiple commits where created in a short time and then only the latest was actually executed. Apart from that I think it's a good idea since it wil

Re: [DISCUSS] TravisCI auto cancellation

+1 to Greg's suggestion. On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Greg Hogan wrote: > Hi, > > Just saw this TravisCI beta feature. I think this would be worthwhile to > enable on pull request builds. We could leave branch builds unchanged since > there are fewer builds of this type and skipping builds w