Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move testing from Travis CI to GitHub Actions #479

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 23, 2020
Merged

Conversation

hugovk
Copy link
Member

@hugovk hugovk commented Nov 14, 2020

Travis CI has a new pricing model which places limits on open source.

Many projects are moving to GitHub Actions instead, let's do the same.

We already have tests on GHA, just missing sending coverage to Codecov. Earlier it was tricky to do, but Codecov now have an action for this; added here. Done in #480.


We'll need to move deployment from Travis to GHA. We already got it working for another Jazzband project, but I'll do it in a followup PR.

So this one reduces the Travis testing to a single job.


This also fixes a pytest warning: Done in #480.

@hugovk hugovk changed the title Reduce Travis CI testing Move testing from Travis CI to GitHub Actions Nov 14, 2020
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 14, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #479 (5131ea2) into master (22c88de) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #479   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   90.66%   90.66%           
=======================================
  Files          28       28           
  Lines        2613     2613           
=======================================
  Hits         2369     2369           
  Misses        244      244           

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 22c88de...5131ea2. Read the comment docs.

@claudep
Copy link
Contributor

claudep commented Nov 14, 2020

I'm not so thrilled to add even more dependencies on Github. I don't see Travis limitation a problem for our usage, do you?

@hugovk
Copy link
Member Author

hugovk commented Nov 14, 2020

Unfortunately yes, others and I are seeing big problems with Travis CI.

First, travis-ci.org has been really slow (maybe we were lucky just now, on a Saturday) with long delays of sometimes up to an hour before jobs begin.

That's because they've been moving resources from .org to travis-ci.com, and everything will need to be moved to travis-ci.com by the end of the year, when .org will be closed down.

Second, there's a new credit-based pricing model on .com. They give a 10k-credit free trial, enough for 1k Linux minutes. When that expires they encourage you to buy a plan or ask to be on some new OSS plan, where if the project meets the requirements, they will evaluate how many credits the project can have. It's not clear if this renews monthly or if the process must be repeated when the credits expire.

I've applied for credits for another project but not got very far yet.

Some more info here:

@claudep
Copy link
Contributor

claudep commented Nov 14, 2020

Thanks so much for this detailed report. I would not rush however in changing things, firstly because tablib does not see so much activity (we can affort waiting 1-2 hours for tests) and Travis may react to the Web feedback at some point.

@hugovk
Copy link
Member Author

hugovk commented Nov 14, 2020

Okay, let's wait a bit.

I'll make a new PR with the first commit (GHA coverage) and third (fix pytest warning), they're still useful now. Edit: #480.

@hugovk hugovk mentioned this pull request Nov 14, 2020
@hugovk
Copy link
Member Author

hugovk commented Nov 14, 2020

(Rebased after merging subset #480.)

@hugovk
Copy link
Member Author

hugovk commented Nov 20, 2020

All Jazzband repos need porting over to GHA:

@jezdez
Copy link
Member

jezdez commented Nov 20, 2020

The alternatives of course are Azure, GitLab, Circle CI and a few others. Given the fact that GitHub Actions are designed to allow self-hosted test runners I'd say the risk of lock-in is manageable compared to the added benefits of direct integration in the GitHub development workflow.

Luckily there is https://github.com/ymyzk/tox-gh-actions so the migration of all projects should be relatively straight-forward.

@jezdez jezdez merged commit 3dc6268 into jazzband:master Nov 23, 2020
@hugovk hugovk deleted the gha branch November 23, 2020 10:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants