I’m sure everyone has noticed that Travis CI fails, incorrectly, more than it 
succeeds, often due to timeouts and not b/c of the incorrectness of a commit or 
PR.

This has been discussed previously, but it’s carried on, and become a low 
information signal about the PRs, which has two big impacts: (1) it’s ignored 
by experienced contributors and reviewers, and (2) it’s confusing or misleading 
to new contributors.

So, we really need to find a solution. I can think of a few:

1. Continue to push on INFRA to setup Jenkins for NiFi and its sub-projects.

2. Implement some kind of quick-test profile and shell script that checks the 
most important things along with the subdirectories affected by the PR, and 
continue to use Travis CI.

3. Use some other service like Circle CI or Codeship, which probably isn’t 
quite what ASF wants but it might make the CI more useful (it also might not).

4. Find a sponsor to support a more premium tier of Travis CI (or equiv.) so 
the build has enough resources to to succeed. This too probably isn’t 
preferable but I’m sure we can find a precedent.

I’m partial to pursuing (1) and (2) together because (1) would give us a long 
term solution and (2) would have some value for local builds (no need to run 
the full build) as well as making Travis CI tell us something. The first should 
be pretty low effort. The second will be labor intensive I think — to identify 
what counts as quick and change the poms — so it can’t be the answer on its own 
unless we want to wait longer to see Travis CI become informative.

What do the rest of you think?

-joey

Reply via email to