Re: [racket-dev] Re: Continuous Integration update and future

I think there are a few issues worth separating here: 1. snapshot.racket-lang.org is not a download site, but a page with two links. We could fix this by having some redirects/URL rewrites, perhaps from download.racket-lang.org. 2. when one of the snapshot builds fails, there's no notice/somet

Re: [racket-dev] Re: Continuous Integration update and future

This makes sense to me, but it would be easy to choose the wrong path protocol. Things are definitely interesting around source builds—what do I put for {platform} there? … and of course CS, which is an alternative now but should soon become the default. Also, there are things like “.tgz” bundli

Re: [racket-dev] Re: Continuous Integration update and future

While it's about CI of Racket programs rather than of Racket itself, I wanted to point to a recent discussion on Greg Hendershott's "travis-racket" repository: https://github.com/greghendershott/travis-racket/issues/37 I think it's a very important piece of tooling for the Racket environment, and,

Re: [racket-dev] Re: Continuous Integration update and future

This sounds great. I see also that Bogdan has developed an action for downloading Racket. Let's continue this work by organizing in the #ci channel on Slack, which I've just created. Anyone else who's interested should join that channel, and we'll work out next steps there. Sam On Sat, Nov 16,

[racket-dev] Re: Continuous Integration update and future

I'm relatively in favor of a GitHub Actions based approach. I was also in the beta and wrote an action for building and testing Racket packages. I would be happy to help with this effort, especially the Docker-based parts of implementing a

[racket-dev] Re: Continuous Integration update and future

Thank you for all your kind emails. It is, as always, a pleasure to contribute to Racket. I spent some time discussing this Sam today which mentioned GitHub Actions. I had actually been part of GitHub Actions Beta and dismissed it straight away because initially they were not supporting self-hos