All the branches are working under GitHub Actions now. Now that it's working I must say that GitHub Actions is much nicer than Travis, so this was a good move. I think there is more than we can do with them beyond the basic i have there but at least we have the basics. Anyone with open PRs would need to rebase to trigger builds.
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 10:21 AM Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > Misha, thank you for these tips. They were indeed helpful. I was able to > get a basic build working more easily than I'd expected on master at this > point. I've moved on to migrating the more exotic parts of the travis build > now. I suppose the final step will be to backport the workflow to the > current maintenance branches and then the migration will be done and we > will be able to remove the travis.yaml file. > > > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 11:49 AM Misha Brukman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Migrating from Travis to GitHub Actions is as simple as removing >> .travis.yml and adding a .github/workflows/*.yml files. >> >> The config specifics differ somewhat (even though they're both >> structurally >> YAML); GitHub Actions lets you import actions which are scripts or tools >> with their own GitHub repos, e.g., when you see something like the >> following in a GitHub Actions YAML file: >> >> - uses: actions/checkout@v2 >> - uses: actions/cache@v2 >> - uses: actions/setup-java@v1 >> >> Those actually refer to these repos: https://github.com/actions/checkout, >> https://github.com/actions/cache, and >> https://github.com/actions/setup-java >> and the "@vX" is a version identifier. >> >> JanusGraph migrated from Travis to GitHub Actions a while back; see the >> configs here, which could be useful as a reference: >> https://github.com/JanusGraph/janusgraph/tree/master/.github/workflows >> >> The docs for GitHub Actions are here: https://docs.github.com/en/actions >> >> Hope this helps! >> >> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 11:12 AM Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Folks offering PRs have pointed out to me that travis is not running for >> > them. After checking in with infra it seems that travis has changed up >> > their billing model and that's causing trouble. It has been recommended >> to >> > me that we switch to GitHub Ations. I'm not thrilled about changing CI, >> but >> > it doesn't appear that things will change any time soon with travis >> > arrangements. >> > >> > Anyone here familiar with GitHub Actions and how to most easily do the >> > migration from Travis? Ideally, we'd want the same build setup that we >> have >> > as Travis as I think it is of the right granularity and gives us the >> right >> > coverage. >> > >> >
