Admittedly I don’t know a single Project, where Travis has not proven to be a source of random CI … All projects I know that have been using it, have migrated to GitHub Actions.
Chris From: Alexander Alten <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, 21. January 2023 at 08:45 To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Travis is needed ? [cid:C97CA163-1C38-403A-8AED-BEFC30A4DAEC] apache/incubator-wayang-website: Apache Wayang is an Cross-Platform processing system<https://github.com/apache/incubator-wayang-website> github.com<https://github.com/apache/incubator-wayang-website> [cid:9E4715A0-B2B1-4F3A-BB65-6ACB703A1444] fixed website link by 2pk03 ・ Pull Request #18 ・ apache/incubator-wayang-website<https://github.com/apache/incubator-wayang-website/pull/18/checks?check_run_id=10774244203> github.com<https://github.com/apache/incubator-wayang-website/pull/18/checks?check_run_id=10774244203> On 21. Jan 2023, at 08:43, Jorge Arnulfo Quiané Ruiz <[email protected]> wrote: Hi guys, But, wasn’t travis already been removed? :p IMHO GitHub actions seems to be a good way to go :) Best, Jorge On 20 Jan 2023, at 15.40, Alexander Alten <[email protected]> wrote: Hi, INFRA discontinues Travis, we need to discuss a timeline to move either to GitHub actions or Jenkins, or other tools the ASF provides. I saw that our website repo already has an .asf.yml, which is used for GH actions. ―Alex On 21. Mar 2022, at 14:05, Bertty Contreras <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Folks, I will remove Travis then :D. Thank you for your opinions. Best regards, Bertty On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 5:33 PM jorge Arnulfo Quiané Ruiz < [email protected]> wrote: +0 no clear preference for me. I am fine with both On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 at 11:05 AM Bertty Contreras <[email protected]> wrote: the documentation step had problem even in TravisCI, and I will take care of it to have it done in GA:D On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 10:17 AM CalvinKirs <[email protected]> wrote: Hi, At present, only the automatic push of documents has not been done, because I am not familiar with it. In addition, all functions of TravisCI have been migrated to GithubAction Best wishes！ Calvin Kirs On 03/18/2022 17:07，Alexander Alten<[email protected]> wrote： Hi, +0 I’m fine with both, but having both - I don’t know. But I support every decision :) Cheers, ―Alex On 18. Mar 2022, at 10:05, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: Hi, It seems the GA coverage is pretty close to Travis, so, I think we can remove Travis and focus on GA. My �0.01 ;) Regards JB On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 11:41 PM Bertty Contreras <[email protected] wrote: Hi Folks, Today I ran one compilation and the differences between TravisCI and Github Actions in terms of start running the job does not have a comparison. Additionally to that @CalvinKirs migrate all the pipelines that we had in TravisCI to Github Action Do we remove TravisCI?? because at this moment it is just a redundant process. Best regards, Bertty -- databloom AI, Inc. 3401 N. MIAMI AVE. STE 230 33127 Miami, Florida United States -- Please consider the environment before printing this email -- Disclaimer: The content of this message is confidential. If you have received it by mistake, please inform us by an email reply and then delete the message. It is forbidden to copy, forward, or in any way reveal the contents of this message to anyone. The integrity and security of this email cannot be guaranteed over the Internet. Therefore, the sender will not be held liable for any damage caused by the message. databloom AI, Inc. 3401 N. MIAMI AVE. STE 230 33127 Miami, Florida United States -- Please consider the environment before printing this email -- Disclaimer: The content of this message is confidential. If you have received it by mistake, please inform us by an email reply and then delete the message. It is forbidden to copy, forward, or in any way reveal the contents of this message to anyone. The integrity and security of this email cannot be guaranteed over the Internet. Therefore, the sender will not be held liable for any damage caused by the message.
