Hi David, Thanks for taking a look at this. Anything that can improve the feedback loop and ease of use is very welcome.
One question I have is about the supported architectures. For example a while back we voted KIP-942 to add ppc64le to the Jenkins CI. Due to significant performance issues with the ppc64le environments this is still not properly enabled yet. See https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Kafka/job/Kafka%20PowerPC%20Daily/ and https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-26011 if you are interested in the details. I'm wondering if we also get access to other architectures via GitHub actions? Thanks, Mickael On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 6:02 PM David Arthur <mum...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Josep, > > > By having CI commenting on the PR > everyone watching the PR (author and reviewers) will get notified when it's > done. > > Faster feedback is an immediate improvement I'd like to pursue. Even having > a separate PR status check for "compile + validate" would save the author a > trip digging through logs. Doing this with GH Actions is pretty > straightforward. > > David, > > 1. I will bring this up with Infra. They probably have some idea of my > intentions, due to all my questions, but I'll raise it directly. > > 2. I can think of two approaches for this. First, we can write a script > that produces the desired output given the junit XML reports. This can then > be used to leave a comment on the PR. Another is to add a summary block to > the workflow run. For example in this workflow: > https://github.com/mumrah/kafka/actions/runs/10409319037?pr=5 below the > workflow graph, there are summary sections. These are produced by steps of > the workflow. > > There are also Action plugins that render junit reports in various ways. > > --- > > Here is a PR that adds the action I've been experimenting with > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/16895. I've restricted it to only run > on pushes to branches named "gh-" to avoid suddenly overwhelming the ASF > runner pool. I have split the workflow into two jobs which are reported as > separate status checks (see https://github.com/mumrah/kafka/pull/5 for > example). > > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 9:00 AM David Jacot <dja...@confluent.io.invalid> > wrote: > > > Hi David, > > > > Thanks for working on this. Overall, I am supportive. I have two > > questions/comments. > > > > 1. I wonder if we should discuss with the infra team in order to ensure > > that they have enough capacity for us to use the action runners. Our CI is > > pretty greedy in general. We could also discuss with them whether they > > could move the capacity that we used in Jenkins to the runners. I think > > that Kafka was one of the most, if not the most, heavy users of the shared > > Jenkins infra. I think that they will appreciate the heads up. > > > > 2. Would it be possible to improve how failed tests are reported? For > > instance, the tests in your PR failed with `1448 tests completed, 2 > > failed`. First it is quite hard to see it because the logs are long. Second > > it is almost impossible to find those two failed tests. In my opinion, we > > can not use it in the current state to merge pull requests. Do you know if > > there are ways to improve this? > > > > Best, > > David > > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 2:44 PM 黃竣陽 <s7133...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello David, > > > > > > I find the Jenkins UI to be quite unfriendly for developers, and the > > > Apache Jenkins instance is often unreliable. > > > On the other hand, the new GitHub Actions UI is much more appealing to > > me. > > > If GitHub Actions proves to be more > > > stable than Jenkins, I believe it would be a worthwhile change to switch > > > to GitHub Actions. > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > Jiunn Yang > > > > Josep Prat <josep.p...@aiven.io.INVALID> 於 2024年8月16日 下午4:57 寫道： > > > > > > > > Hi David, > > > > One of the enhancements we can have with this change (it's easier to do > > > > with GH actions) is to write back the result of the CI run as a comment > > > on > > > > the PR itself. I believe not needing to periodically check CI to see if > > > the > > > > run finished would be a great win. By having CI commenting on the PR > > > > everyone watching the PR (author and reviewers) will get notified when > > > it's > > > > done. > > > > > > > > > > > -- > David Arthur
