I agree this would be extremely nice to get back on track. The changes made last night/today to the poms do appear to mean that parallel builds with contrib-check are working. Perhaps that helps us a little with travis (or not). I have reviewed a couple PRs though recently that did not even compile much less have clean contrib-checks so it is really nice to have Travis being more reliable. Does anyone have any sense of the current reasons for issues? When I've looked the errors made no sense at all.
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Joey Frazee <joey.fra...@icloud.com> wrote: > 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
