You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@nifi.apache.org by Kevin Doran <kd...@apache.org> on 2019/08/12 14:09:56 UTC
[DISCUSS] GitHub Actions for CI
Hi NiFi devs,
GitHub recently added a beta of their redesigned CI/CD feature,
Actions [1]. It looks like the Apache GitHub organization has this
bata feature, which is opt-in, enabled at the org level, and that we
have the option to enable it for our NiFi repositories, e.g. [2][3].
Actions, like Travis CI, is free to use for public GitHub
repositories. Given that our project's difficulty in getting Travis CI
to run reliably for builds, I am wondering if it would be advantageous
to evaluate Actions as an alternative. From what I can tell, it should
be possible to have both enabled, allowing us to do a trial of Actions
while continuing to use Travis CI.
Ultimately, I think our CI builds will benefit from breaking up the
nifi repository into multiple repositories, as previously discussed
[4][5]. In the meantime / in addition to taking this step, I think it
would be worthwhile to evaluate alternatives to Travis CI, which many
have experienced difficulty using.
- Has anyone had a chance to use the new beta of Actions on a project
other than NiFi, and if so what has your experience been?
- Are there any free to use Travis CI alternatives other than Actions
we should also be considering?
- Are there any objections to enabling Actions on our Apache NiFi
GitHub repositories, and setting up CI builds for PRs and commits on
master, similar to how we are using Travis now?
[1] https://help.github.com/en/articles/about-github-actions
[2] https://github.com/apache/nifi/actions
[3] https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/actions
[4] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/939a7630a2e32594cd10444e48b7a1321fd9ce51834d911a8c04b6a9@%3Cdev.nifi.apache.org%3E
[5] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/NiFi+Project+and+Repository+Restructuring
Thanks,
Kevin
Re: [DISCUSS] GitHub Actions for CI
Posted by Pierre Villard <pi...@gmail.com>.
I was wondering how this would be considered by the Infra team but if they
are encouraging to try it out, I'd definitely look into it for NiFi. If it
can remove some limitations we are facing with Travis and offer additional
features, it's definitely a good idea.
Besides that, I didn't try to confirm, but based on the doc, it looks like
that Actions would work out of the box on forked repo by default (without
requiring them to be configured again - as it is the case with Travis). It
looks really interesting for open source projects with an active community
like the one we have on NiFi.
Pierre
Le lun. 12 août 2019 à 16:52, Otto Fowler <ot...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> Just a note, the feedback from INFRA on the builds list is that they are
> encouraging projects to try it out and give feedback on any issues so that
> they can be addressed and overcome.
>
> Builds List Thread
> <
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-builds/201908.mbox/%3cd425ae5c-7977-7aed-7fd8-ef63a6c0a850@apache.org%3e
> >
>
>
>
>
> On August 12, 2019 at 10:10:09, Kevin Doran (kdoran@apache.org) wrote:
>
> Hi NiFi devs,
>
> GitHub recently added a beta of their redesigned CI/CD feature,
> Actions [1]. It looks like the Apache GitHub organization has this
> bata feature, which is opt-in, enabled at the org level, and that we
> have the option to enable it for our NiFi repositories, e.g. [2][3].
>
> Actions, like Travis CI, is free to use for public GitHub
> repositories. Given that our project's difficulty in getting Travis CI
> to run reliably for builds, I am wondering if it would be advantageous
> to evaluate Actions as an alternative. From what I can tell, it should
> be possible to have both enabled, allowing us to do a trial of Actions
> while continuing to use Travis CI.
>
> Ultimately, I think our CI builds will benefit from breaking up the
> nifi repository into multiple repositories, as previously discussed
> [4][5]. In the meantime / in addition to taking this step, I think it
> would be worthwhile to evaluate alternatives to Travis CI, which many
> have experienced difficulty using.
>
> - Has anyone had a chance to use the new beta of Actions on a project
> other than NiFi, and if so what has your experience been?
> - Are there any free to use Travis CI alternatives other than Actions
> we should also be considering?
> - Are there any objections to enabling Actions on our Apache NiFi
> GitHub repositories, and setting up CI builds for PRs and commits on
> master, similar to how we are using Travis now?
>
> [1] https://help.github.com/en/articles/about-github-actions
> [2] https://github.com/apache/nifi/actions
> [3] https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/actions
> [4]
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/939a7630a2e32594cd10444e48b7a1321fd9ce51834d911a8c04b6a9@%3Cdev.nifi.apache.org%3E
> [5]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/NiFi+Project+and+Repository+Restructuring
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin
>
Re: [DISCUSS] GitHub Actions for CI
Posted by Kevin Doran <kd...@apache.org>.
Otto,
Thank you for the link to the builds list thread! I had missed that,
and it is really helpful to know where INFRA stands on this.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:52 AM Otto Fowler <ot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just a note, the feedback from INFRA on the builds list is that they are
> encouraging projects to try it out and give feedback on any issues so that
> they can be addressed and overcome.
>
> Builds List Thread
> <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-builds/201908.mbox/%3cd425ae5c-7977-7aed-7fd8-ef63a6c0a850@apache.org%3e>
>
>
>
>
> On August 12, 2019 at 10:10:09, Kevin Doran (kdoran@apache.org) wrote:
>
> Hi NiFi devs,
>
> GitHub recently added a beta of their redesigned CI/CD feature,
> Actions [1]. It looks like the Apache GitHub organization has this
> bata feature, which is opt-in, enabled at the org level, and that we
> have the option to enable it for our NiFi repositories, e.g. [2][3].
>
> Actions, like Travis CI, is free to use for public GitHub
> repositories. Given that our project's difficulty in getting Travis CI
> to run reliably for builds, I am wondering if it would be advantageous
> to evaluate Actions as an alternative. From what I can tell, it should
> be possible to have both enabled, allowing us to do a trial of Actions
> while continuing to use Travis CI.
>
> Ultimately, I think our CI builds will benefit from breaking up the
> nifi repository into multiple repositories, as previously discussed
> [4][5]. In the meantime / in addition to taking this step, I think it
> would be worthwhile to evaluate alternatives to Travis CI, which many
> have experienced difficulty using.
>
> - Has anyone had a chance to use the new beta of Actions on a project
> other than NiFi, and if so what has your experience been?
> - Are there any free to use Travis CI alternatives other than Actions
> we should also be considering?
> - Are there any objections to enabling Actions on our Apache NiFi
> GitHub repositories, and setting up CI builds for PRs and commits on
> master, similar to how we are using Travis now?
>
> [1] https://help.github.com/en/articles/about-github-actions
> [2] https://github.com/apache/nifi/actions
> [3] https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/actions
> [4]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/939a7630a2e32594cd10444e48b7a1321fd9ce51834d911a8c04b6a9@%3Cdev.nifi.apache.org%3E
> [5]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/NiFi+Project+and+Repository+Restructuring
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin
Re: [DISCUSS] GitHub Actions for CI
Posted by Otto Fowler <ot...@gmail.com>.
Just a note, the feedback from INFRA on the builds list is that they are
encouraging projects to try it out and give feedback on any issues so that
they can be addressed and overcome.
Builds List Thread
<http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-builds/201908.mbox/%3cd425ae5c-7977-7aed-7fd8-ef63a6c0a850@apache.org%3e>
On August 12, 2019 at 10:10:09, Kevin Doran (kdoran@apache.org) wrote:
Hi NiFi devs,
GitHub recently added a beta of their redesigned CI/CD feature,
Actions [1]. It looks like the Apache GitHub organization has this
bata feature, which is opt-in, enabled at the org level, and that we
have the option to enable it for our NiFi repositories, e.g. [2][3].
Actions, like Travis CI, is free to use for public GitHub
repositories. Given that our project's difficulty in getting Travis CI
to run reliably for builds, I am wondering if it would be advantageous
to evaluate Actions as an alternative. From what I can tell, it should
be possible to have both enabled, allowing us to do a trial of Actions
while continuing to use Travis CI.
Ultimately, I think our CI builds will benefit from breaking up the
nifi repository into multiple repositories, as previously discussed
[4][5]. In the meantime / in addition to taking this step, I think it
would be worthwhile to evaluate alternatives to Travis CI, which many
have experienced difficulty using.
- Has anyone had a chance to use the new beta of Actions on a project
other than NiFi, and if so what has your experience been?
- Are there any free to use Travis CI alternatives other than Actions
we should also be considering?
- Are there any objections to enabling Actions on our Apache NiFi
GitHub repositories, and setting up CI builds for PRs and commits on
master, similar to how we are using Travis now?
[1] https://help.github.com/en/articles/about-github-actions
[2] https://github.com/apache/nifi/actions
[3] https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/actions
[4]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/939a7630a2e32594cd10444e48b7a1321fd9ce51834d911a8c04b6a9@%3Cdev.nifi.apache.org%3E
[5]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/NiFi+Project+and+Repository+Restructuring
Thanks,
Kevin