+1! This will be really helpful when looking at my PRs; I basically get no signal from the current state of the github UI, and this will restore that to giving me very strong positive signal.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 6:22 PM, Davor Bonaci <[email protected]> wrote: > Early on in the project, we've discussed our CI needs and concluded to use > ASF-hosted Jenkins as our preferred tool of choice. We've also enabled > Travis-CI, which covered some scenarios that Jenkins couldn't do at the > time, but with the idea to transition to Jenkins eventually. > > Over the last few months, Travis-CI has been broken consistently, and > several different kinds of infrastructure breakages have been added, one on > top of another. This has caused plenty of cost and confusion. In > particular, contributors often get confused as to which signal they should > care about. > > At the same time, Jenkins capabilities have improved greatly: multiple > parallel precommits are now supported, checked-in DSL support, pipelined > matrix builds, Google's donation of Jenkins executors more than doubled, > and others. > > So, based on the previous consensus and the fact the signal was broken for > a long time, Jason and I went and asked Infra to disable Travis-CI on our > code repository. (Website repository was disabled months ago.) > > I believe there should be minimal impact of this. The only two elements of > the Travis matrix that were passing (still) are Python SDK on the Linux & > Mac. Linux one can be trivially moved to Jenkins -- and I know Jason is > looking at that. Mac coverage is the only loss at the moment, but is > something we can likely address in the (near) future. > > I'm excited that we finally managed to unify our CI tooling, and can make > efforts on improving and maintaining one system as opposed to two. That > said, please comment if you have any worries about this or ideas for > further CI improvements ;-) > > Davor >
