I think we may change the travis script a little bit, to find out if we can run the integration test once per day.
Willem Jiang Twitter: willemjiang Weibo: 姜宁willem On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:45 AM, wjm wjm <zzz...@gmail.com> wrote: > multiple SC is no problem, infact, not all test case should be run for > multiple SC > > the problem is Travis is so slow > yes, we can not ask too much about that, so my suggestion is to make > integration test independent > that will not block our PR > and integration test run once a day at least, can make sure there are not > too many mistakes. > > for contributors, still must provide unit test case, and better to provide > integration test, that not too much different than current > > 2018-07-10 21:17 GMT+08:00 Willem Jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com>: > > > As Travis is a free service for Open Source projects, we cannot ask too > > much about that. > > Current ASF provides Jenkins Service here[1], there are some shortcoming > > if we use it, such as lots of projects use it, and it doesn't integrate > > with github. > > > > For running the test case with different SC, I think we could leverage > the > > env properties[2] to run the test separately. > > Current we run the saga build with Spring Boot 1.x and Spring Boot 2.x > [3], > > I think it quite easy to list all the SC versions as the env properties > > those we need to support. > > > > [1]https://builds.apache.org/ > > [2] > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-servicecomb-saga/ > > blob/master/.travis.yml#L28 > > [3]https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-servicecomb-saga > > > > > > Willem Jiang > > > > Twitter: willemjiang > > Weibo: 姜宁willem > > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 8:56 PM, wjm wjm <zzz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > yes > > > everything no problem. but: > > > > > > 1.Travis is so slow, not our integration test too slow > > > when run in our development environment, it's very fast. > > > 2.when run all test case multi times with different SC, will produce > too > > > many log, that will treat Travis log size limit. > > > > > > 2018-07-10 19:23 GMT+08:00 Sure <sure_0...@qq.com>: > > > > > > > Agree! > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Just like willem.jiang said, we can push multiple SC versions to > > > docker > > > > hub > > > > 2. Chassis integration test can run with different SC version in > every > > > time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------ > > > > 发件人: "willem.jiang"<willem.ji...@gmail.com>; > > > > 发送时间: 2018年7月10日(星期二) 下午5:16 > > > > 收件人: "dev"<dev@servicecomb.apache.org>; > > > > > > > > 主题: Re: [DISCUSS] about integration test > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Current ServiceComb CI just leverage service of Travis[1] which has a > > > very > > > > good integration with Github. > > > > > > > > Current we don't test the multiple SC at same time, but I think with > > the > > > > help of docker, it could easy for us to run the examples against > > multiple > > > > version of SC. > > > > From the proposal, we need multiple node to handle the test, it could > > be > > > a > > > > challenge for us if we still use Travis. > > > > > > > > If we put the integration test in a separated project we may need to > > > find a > > > > way to let the integration test looks up the latest snap short > artifact > > > for > > > > running the test. > > > > > > > > Any thought? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Willem Jiang > > > > > > > > Twitter: willemjiang > > > > Weibo: 姜宁willem > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:41 AM, wjm wjm <zzz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > currently we embed integration test with PR CI > > > > > > > > > > but: > > > > > 1.we will add more and more integration test case > > > > > 2.test time will be more and more longer > > > > > 3.integration test should include work with multiple SC versions > > > > > 4....... > > > > > > > > > > so, maybe it's better that make integration test to be a > independent > > > > > project, and run it once a day at least > > > > > > > > > > some other idea of integration test: > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCB-719 > > > > > > > > > > what's your suggestion? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
