Travis CI broken on Github

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Travis CI broken on Github

David Bjergaard-2
Hi,

Does anyone know how to fix the travis builds? Its making it really hard to know
if its safe to merge PRs or if I'm not breaking stuff.  If it can't be fixed, I
would prefer that we remove it and go back to the old way (waiting for bug
reports :$)

    Dave

_______________________________________________
Stumpwm-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Travis CI broken on Github

David Bjergaard
sbcl always passes, while clisp and ccl fail:
ccl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369075
clisp: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369077
sbcl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369074

    David

Evan <[hidden email]> writes:

> Can you give an example of how the travis builds are broken?
>
> -E
>
> On 08/06/2015 03:16 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Does anyone know how to fix the travis builds? Its making it really hard to know
>> if its safe to merge PRs or if I'm not breaking stuff.  If it can't be fixed, I
>> would prefer that we remove it and go back to the old way (waiting for bug
>> reports :$)
>>
>>     Dave
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
>>

_______________________________________________
Stumpwm-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Travis CI broken on Github

Evan-59
When you say "sbcl always passes" do you mean even when broken code is committed?

Where is the code for the travis builds kept? Do we have a repo containing the directives
that travis follows?

With regards to ditching travis if we can't figure out how to get the ccl/clisp builds to
work properly, it seems that we're still better off with one of the platforms being
tested, even if it means you have to investigate every failed travis build. It's not
ideal, and it'd probably be worth it to either cut out or move the ccl/clisp builds to
their own branch while we investigate what's wrong, but ditching travis all together is
probably unnecessary.

-E

On 08/07/2015 03:34 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:

> sbcl always passes, while clisp and ccl fail:
> ccl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369075
> clisp: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369077
> sbcl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369074
>
>     David
>
> Evan <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> Can you give an example of how the travis builds are broken?
>>
>> -E
>>
>> On 08/06/2015 03:16 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Does anyone know how to fix the travis builds? Its making it really hard to know
>>> if its safe to merge PRs or if I'm not breaking stuff.  If it can't be fixed, I
>>> would prefer that we remove it and go back to the old way (waiting for bug
>>> reports :$)
>>>
>>>     Dave
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
>>>

_______________________________________________
Stumpwm-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Travis CI broken on Github

David Bjergaard
Hi Evan,

Responses inline:

Evan <[hidden email]> writes:

> When you say "sbcl always passes" do you mean even when broken code is committed?
I mean when sbcl builds successfully if the code is OK. If you commit broken
code, then sbcl will fail. Conversely clisp and ccl always fail even if the code
is clearly fine (ie you add a comment and commit it, or change a file that
doesn't depend on the build)
>
> Where is the code for the travis builds kept? Do we have a repo containing the directives
> that travis follows?
As far as I can tell the recipe is stumpwm/.travis.yml  and "install.sh" which
is the main driver of the code.  The latest and greatest is here:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/luismbo/cl-travis/master/install.sh
>
> With regards to ditching travis if we can't figure out how to get the ccl/clisp builds to
> work properly, it seems that we're still better off with one of the platforms being
> tested, even if it means you have to investigate every failed travis build. It's not
> ideal, and it'd probably be worth it to either cut out or move the ccl/clisp builds to
> their own branch while we investigate what's wrong, but ditching travis all together is
> probably unnecessary.
Ok agreed, but I would prefer that we be able to have a "build passing" badge on
stumpwm's main page so users can at least judge whether or not the master branch
is safe to use.  

    David



>
> -E
>
> On 08/07/2015 03:34 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>> sbcl always passes, while clisp and ccl fail:
>> ccl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369075
>> clisp: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369077
>> sbcl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369074
>>
>>     David
>>
>> Evan <[hidden email]> writes:
>>
>>> Can you give an example of how the travis builds are broken?
>>>
>>> -E
>>>
>>> On 08/06/2015 03:16 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know how to fix the travis builds? Its making it really hard to know
>>>> if its safe to merge PRs or if I'm not breaking stuff.  If it can't be fixed, I
>>>> would prefer that we remove it and go back to the old way (waiting for bug
>>>> reports :$)
>>>>
>>>>     Dave
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
>>>>

_______________________________________________
Stumpwm-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Travis CI broken on Github

Evan-59
Hey David,

Please see issue [217] and PR [218] about this issue. I haven't attempted to build this pr
on anything but ccl, so travis will tell us how it fairs shortly. If all goes well, this
should solve ccl's build problems.

[217]https://github.com/stumpwm/stumpwm/issues/217
[218]https://github.com/stumpwm/stumpwm/pull/218

-E

On 08/11/2015 10:25 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:

> Hi Evan,
>
> Responses inline:
>
> Evan <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> When you say "sbcl always passes" do you mean even when broken code is committed?
> I mean when sbcl builds successfully if the code is OK. If you commit broken
> code, then sbcl will fail. Conversely clisp and ccl always fail even if the code
> is clearly fine (ie you add a comment and commit it, or change a file that
> doesn't depend on the build)
>>
>> Where is the code for the travis builds kept? Do we have a repo containing the directives
>> that travis follows?
> As far as I can tell the recipe is stumpwm/.travis.yml  and "install.sh" which
> is the main driver of the code.  The latest and greatest is here:
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/luismbo/cl-travis/master/install.sh
>>
>> With regards to ditching travis if we can't figure out how to get the ccl/clisp builds to
>> work properly, it seems that we're still better off with one of the platforms being
>> tested, even if it means you have to investigate every failed travis build. It's not
>> ideal, and it'd probably be worth it to either cut out or move the ccl/clisp builds to
>> their own branch while we investigate what's wrong, but ditching travis all together is
>> probably unnecessary.
> Ok agreed, but I would prefer that we be able to have a "build passing" badge on
> stumpwm's main page so users can at least judge whether or not the master branch
> is safe to use.  
>
>     David
>
>
>
>>
>> -E
>>
>> On 08/07/2015 03:34 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>>> sbcl always passes, while clisp and ccl fail:
>>> ccl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369075
>>> clisp: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369077
>>> sbcl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369074
>>>
>>>     David
>>>
>>> Evan <[hidden email]> writes:
>>>
>>>> Can you give an example of how the travis builds are broken?
>>>>
>>>> -E
>>>>
>>>> On 08/06/2015 03:16 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone know how to fix the travis builds? Its making it really hard to know
>>>>> if its safe to merge PRs or if I'm not breaking stuff.  If it can't be fixed, I
>>>>> would prefer that we remove it and go back to the old way (waiting for bug
>>>>> reports :$)
>>>>>
>>>>>     Dave
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
>>>>>

_______________________________________________
Stumpwm-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Travis CI broken on Github

David Bjergaard
Woohoo, thanks!

Evan <[hidden email]> writes:

> Hey David,
>
> Please see issue [217] and PR [218] about this issue. I haven't attempted to build this pr
> on anything but ccl, so travis will tell us how it fairs shortly. If all goes well, this
> should solve ccl's build problems.
>
> [217]https://github.com/stumpwm/stumpwm/issues/217
> [218]https://github.com/stumpwm/stumpwm/pull/218
>
> -E
>
> On 08/11/2015 10:25 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>> Hi Evan,
>>
>> Responses inline:
>>
>> Evan <[hidden email]> writes:
>>
>>> When you say "sbcl always passes" do you mean even when broken code is committed?
>> I mean when sbcl builds successfully if the code is OK. If you commit broken
>> code, then sbcl will fail. Conversely clisp and ccl always fail even if the code
>> is clearly fine (ie you add a comment and commit it, or change a file that
>> doesn't depend on the build)
>>>
>>> Where is the code for the travis builds kept? Do we have a repo containing the directives
>>> that travis follows?
>> As far as I can tell the recipe is stumpwm/.travis.yml  and "install.sh" which
>> is the main driver of the code.  The latest and greatest is here:
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/luismbo/cl-travis/master/install.sh
>>>
>>> With regards to ditching travis if we can't figure out how to get the ccl/clisp builds to
>>> work properly, it seems that we're still better off with one of the platforms being
>>> tested, even if it means you have to investigate every failed travis build. It's not
>>> ideal, and it'd probably be worth it to either cut out or move the ccl/clisp builds to
>>> their own branch while we investigate what's wrong, but ditching travis all together is
>>> probably unnecessary.
>> Ok agreed, but I would prefer that we be able to have a "build passing" badge on
>> stumpwm's main page so users can at least judge whether or not the master branch
>> is safe to use.  
>>
>>     David
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> -E
>>>
>>> On 08/07/2015 03:34 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>>>> sbcl always passes, while clisp and ccl fail:
>>>> ccl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369075
>>>> clisp: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369077
>>>> sbcl: https://travis-ci.org/stumpwm/stumpwm/jobs/74369074
>>>>
>>>>     David
>>>>
>>>> Evan <[hidden email]> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Can you give an example of how the travis builds are broken?
>>>>>
>>>>> -E
>>>>>
>>>>> On 08/06/2015 03:16 AM, David Bjergaard wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone know how to fix the travis builds? Its making it really hard to know
>>>>>> if its safe to merge PRs or if I'm not breaking stuff.  If it can't be fixed, I
>>>>>> would prefer that we remove it and go back to the old way (waiting for bug
>>>>>> reports :$)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
>>>>>>

_______________________________________________
Stumpwm-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel