Yep, that's all I was doing.  I'm in favor of adding it to Travis.

On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 10:28 AM Michael Miklavcic <
michael.miklav...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think Justin was just giving rationale, not suggesting we shouldn't make
> the improvements. I think at one point we also had some ambiguity about
> whether or how Docker was going to run in Travis, but I believe some folks
> have found a path through that? I agree with you both - let's get this
> added to Travis. Good suggestion, Nick. +1.
>
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 7:53 AM Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org> wrote:
>
> > Yes, running up Full Dev is a manual verification that is required.  And
> as
> > a manual verification sometimes that will get missed.  And in this
> specific
> > case, tt does seem a bit silly that the addition of a parser should
> require
> > the contributor to run up Full Dev.
> >
> > That being said, anything we can do to reduce the amount of manual
> > verification that is required is a good thing.  We should be pushing
> > ourselves to an end state where no manual verification is required for
> any
> > Metron PR.  I think building the RPMs/DEBs as part of the Travis build is
> > at least a small step in the right direction.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 9:34 AM Justin Leet <justinjl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Theoretically, we didn't need to before there were both RPMs and DEBs
> > since
> > > running dev up (which necessitates building those) is part of the build
> > > process. Since they've been split apart, I agree we probably should be
> > > building them, because nobody is going to run both unless they
> > specifically
> > > done something they'd expect to affect both.
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 9:30 AM Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In light of issues like this
> > https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1419,
> > > > has anyone looked into building our RPMs and DEBs in Travis?  This
> is a
> > > > very common and easy mistake to make and our CI builds really should
> be
> > > > able to catch this.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to