The IT do successfully start in Travis just fine, but Travis has a time limit of 50 minutes for open-source projects, and Phoenix ITs run for almost 3 hours. This limit is applied per 'job' and not to the complete cycle. I did attempt to break down Phoenix ITs into multiple jobs, but couldn't complete that due to lack of experience with Maven and other plugins. Hence, I proposed to initiate the on-boarding process which would be no-op for existing Phoneix contributors. It is not yet ready to be a replace ASK infra, at least not yet.
Ignoring TravisCI and CodeCov specifically (I have no affinity or anti-affinity to either), the aim was to get a similar experience - devs publishing new PRs and/or pushing new commits to existing PRs should trigger automated build and test-runs; and show code-coverage reports in addition to test reports. Currently, devs are required to squash all their commits into a single one and upload patches to trigger test runs. Also, there is no visibility into coverage info from our test runs. If Yetus or anything else in ASF infra can support that, I can attempt onboarding to them. On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:49 AM Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: > Travis is underpowered compared to ASF test infrastructure. Do the > integration tests run there? > > Recommend using ASF infra and Yetus (yetus.apache.org). HBase provides a > completely worked example of how to integrate and use it for precommit. > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:15 AM Priyank Porwal <priyankpor...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > [Converting this thread to a community vote] > > > > I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some > > success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout - > > https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3 > > > > Things to note: > > 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits > are > > pushed. No additional developer action is necessary. > > 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which > > produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed > > reports linked from the PR as well. > > 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging > the > > PR. > > 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long > > for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is > > 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several > jobs, > > but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal. > > 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration > (one-time) > > and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR. > > Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner. > > > > Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov. > > > > Thanks, > > Priyank > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva > > <tdsi...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis > CI > > > will automatically runs all the tests > > > and post the results to the PR. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gjac...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this > > > would > > > > be good. > > > > > > > > Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our > code > > > > reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so > > > > TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus. > > > > > > > > An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home > > > > page[2] they mention that open source projects are free. > > > > > > > > Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation > gotchas > > > I'd > > > > be a +1. > > > > > > > > Geoffrey > > > > > > > > [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra > > > > [2] https://travis-ci.org/ > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen < > > wills...@marinsoftware.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this. > > > > > Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup? > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pbo...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT) > > takes > > > > > ~2h. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, < > tdsi...@salesforce.com > > > > > > .invalid> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new > > > > > > contributors > > > > > > > to run tests > > > > > > > and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch > doesn't > > > > break > > > > > > > functionality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal < > > > > > priyankpor...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and > > > > > > > CodeCoverage > > > > > > > > for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and > integration > > > > tests > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do > > > checkstyle > > > > > > checks > > > > > > > > (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of > manual > > > > patch > > > > > > > > uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into > code > > > > > health. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Priyank > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Andrew > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > decrepit hands > - A23, Crosstalk >
