Now that I’ve also stabilized the Jenkins build, I think we should certainly be paying closer attention to CI failures. I think we can maintain the dual CI config for now and see if either approach is more useful for PRs specifically.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 06:57 Volkan Yazıcı <volkan.yaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ralph, even though I am pretty new in the team, I want to step up and state > > that we *do* need them. CI is really convenient to in-take PRs and confirm > > the validity on multiple systems. (I vividly recall the bug surfacing on > > Windows and that was exposed by Jenkins.) Or let me put it the other way > > around: how would you have confidence in your changes by just testing them > > on your system? Hence, I think the CI pipeline is a crucial component of > > this software project and they need to be taken care of accordingly. > > > > Have they ever worked? I don't know, I guess not. Though I am putting > > significant effort into making GitHub Actions work (which they do, as of > > this moment of writing) and I will keep on doing so. As a small wish, I > > will appreciate it if every contributor can spare some time on changes they > > commit that break the builds -- which should be the norm, IMHO. > > > > On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 10:32 PM Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Have they ever worked? I don’t think we need Jenkins, Travis and GitHub > > > Actions. > > > > > > Ralph > > > > > > > On Aug 2, 2020, at 12:03 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > As far as I can tell, we have full support for building PRs in both > > > > Windows and Linux (and macOS supposedly, though I haven't tried that > > > > out) on GitHub Actions. With that configured, I don't think it's > > > > necessary to also run PRs on Travis, especially if their > > > > configurations get out of sync and confuse PR submitters about the > > > > status of their PR build. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>