+1 On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 5:09 AM Jan Šťastný <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello, > > Luckily the github actions workflows are defined within each respective > repository, so it's fully under the developers controls to configure what > is run and how (I assume a profile or system-property needs to be set). > > For tests results, I find it also kinda blurry when it comes to reviewing > test results in GHA, but one example PR: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/actions/runs/9186543090?pr=3523 > 1. See Annotations section which lists the failed tests > 2. See the JUnit Test Report in the bottom of the summary page. > > I see that the missing part is a log portion relevant to a particular > example, but it should be part of a surefire/failsafe report so can be > perhaps also populated somehow. > > Important thing to note is that current Jenkins PR checks due to Github > Source Branch Jenkins plugin limitations and long execution times run sort > of a compile downstream build, running tests only for target repository of > the PR and for upstream/downstream repositories it runs just quick > compilation. And there's not an easy way to achieve splitting of the PR > checks as is the case in GHA that would reduce the time to run and more > flexible rerunning (of a subset of builds). > > Regards > Jan > > On Wed, 22 May 2024 at 10:55, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Jan, > > I have seen Jenkins check failing while GHA worked. > > The Jenkins failure that was not reported by GHA (at least the one I can > > recall right none, but others cannot be excluded) was a format issue (I > > forgot to format one of the modified classes) > > So maybe worth to include a format check to ensure the same that happened > > to me that not happens to other (format can be interpreted as a picky > > thing, but my experience in v7 told me is important because the final > > result is a code with erratic tabbing and import policy that cause a bad > > impression to newcomers) > > > > On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 10:47 AM Christofer Dutz < > > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Most Apache project that I’m involved in use GitHub actions for testing > > > the PRs and only use Jenkins for deploying of Snapshots and running > tests > > > that GitHub doesn’t allow us to run. > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > Von: Enrique Gonzalez Martinez <[email protected]> > > > Datum: Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2024 um 10:34 > > > An: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > > Betreff: Re: [PROPOSAL] Abandon PR checks in Jenkins > > > Hi Jan, > > > > > > What is the impact for the projects ? One of my concerns is related to > > > test outcome publications. Right now github actions are a bit > > > cumbersome. > > > Can you elaborate a bit regarding the impact ? > > > > > > El mié, 22 may 2024 a las 10:00, Jan Šťastný (<[email protected]>) > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > Due to our technical debt in Jenkins PR checks and repeated problems > > with > > > > execution times and long waiting queues, I'd like to propose dropping > > > > Jenkins PR checks for repositories where we have an equivalent > > > alternative > > > > in GHA PR checks. > > > > > > > > That applies most probably to: > > > > - incubator-kie-drools > > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes > > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-apps > > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-examples > > > > - incubator-kie-optaplanner > > > > - incubator-kie-optaplanner-quickstarts > > > > > > > > The assumption is to do a cross-check for each repository whether the > > > scope > > > > of PR checks is equivalent, but generally I am positive GHA actions > are > > > > already superior in terms of flexibility and scope. > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > Jan > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > >
