Ilya, Am 22.01.20 um 23:04 schrieb Илья Шипицин: >> Yes, that's my understanding of GitHub actions as well. However I >> dislike having three types of CI (Travis, Cirrus and GitHub Actions). >> Can Travis be replaced with GitHub Actions for our use case? I guess >> Cirrus can't, because FreeBSD? > > both travis and github actions do offer 4 parallel builds, while cirrus and > app veyor offer 1 parallel build.
Parallel Builds just improve test speed. I don't consider that an important selling point for us. The development process is fairly asynchronous anyway and the important thing is that there are results for more obscure configurations, not that there results within 1 minute. However ... > travis-ci offers ARM64, ppc64le and s390x (not available on github actions). ... that's a good argument to keep Travis-CI. Too bad, I like the GitHub Actions integration better. >>> + - name: fake step >> >> Give a proper name to that step. "Show pwd" is fine. >> > > > there should be no such step. > however, without that step cygwin fails for no visible reason. Then it's even more important to give a good name (or comment). Otherwise you might risk that someone removes it accidentally! >> 2. Split the ./haproxy -vv into a separate step, if that's possible. >> > sure, it's possible > Perfect. I wasn't sure whether the environment was somehow cleaned up in between the steps. Best regards Tim Düsterhus
