build: initial .travis.yml implementation

[addaleax]

Let’s see if this works!

Checklist

• make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
• commit message follows commit guidelines

[vkurchatkin]

Is there an explanation why do we need this?

[addaleax]

@vkurchatkin It gives people feedback a lot faster than waiting for people to manually kick off our CI. Is there any downside? (There’s a chance it doesn’t work out the way we want to, because we generate too many jobs as a project, but I don’t see the harm in trying.)

[mcollina]

I would like this to be limited to Linux to reduce the load on Travis. If the goal is to have a quick feedback, having a single job is better. We can always test OS X on our regular CI. Il giorno gio 31 mag 2018 alle 17:48 Anna Henningsen < notifications@github.com> ha scritto:

…

@vkurchatkin <https://github.com/vkurchatkin> It gives people feedback a lot faster than waiting for people to manually kick off our CI. Is there any downside? (There’s a chance it doesn’t work out the way we want to, because we generate too many jobs as a project, but I don’t see the harm in trying.) — You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#21059 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADL43SfYh0CTvALN2xbd1O6aIiGgu6rks5t4BDRgaJpZM4UVORV> .

[addaleax]

@mcollina Seems fine to me, updated!

[Trott]

I would like this to be limited to Linux to reduce the load on Travis.

I was looking forward to having macOS tests running on something other than the EOL'ed 10.10 that we run it on in CI.

[maclover7]

LGTM, but with a comment...

In theory, we could get this functionality from our existing infra. The github-bot's comment-to-start-build script could be repurposed to trigger a "lite build" or a full CI run. At the risk of this turning into a rant, the number of people actively contributing to the build wg is down to a number that can fit on one hand, and we're in search of more contributors (happy to talk about ways to get involved in any capacity with anybody who's interested)

While I am okay with introducing Travis, I would also urge everybody that depends on Node to take another look at the almost 200 machines that we've already got, and see how we could use them in a smarter way.

[vkurchatkin]

@addaleax oh, I get it, since we don't want to run CI automatically on our infra

[jasnell]

I'm generally good with this so long as it is understood by all collaborators that a travis run does not replace a full CI run.

[yorkie]

@vkurchatkin, why not enabling the automatically CI when a Pull Request is created or commented by a CTC or collaborator?

[addaleax]

@jasnell I think it’s at least worth noting that this does cover the same things as node-test-pull-request-lite, as I understand it. Whether we’d want to accept this as an (arguably more convenient) alternative is another question, of course. :)

[jasnell]

Once we run the experiment for a while and validate it, sure :)

[refack]

I'm ambivalent about this....
On the one hand it just works, and no one here needs to maintain it.
On the other hand it might divert needed attention from the test-CI (See School vouchers), which is already suffering from brain-drain. Like most software projects, IMHO our CI system needs its users engaged, and it's operators rewarded...

[refack]

Here's a named jobs hack:

 .travis.yml | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/.travis.yml b/.travis.yml
index c3b4119ed2f..e9e03a94700 100644
--- a/.travis.yml
+++ b/.travis.yml
@@ -7,9 +7,11 @@ matrix:
   include:
     - os: linux
       node_js: "latest"
+      env: NAME=linter
       script:
         - NODE=$(which node) make lint-ci
     - os: linux
+      env: NAME=test
       install:
         - ./configure
         - make -j2 V=

[mmarchini]

On the other hand it might divert needed attention from the test-CI (See School vouchers), which is already suffering from brain-drain. Like most software projects, IMHO our CI system needs its users engaged, and it's operators rewarded...

Agreed, and if we see Travis is worsening the situation in the Build WG, we can always remove it in the future.

[mcollina]

LGTM

[styfle]

Just wanted to pop in and say, Thank you! 🎉

This is great for someone like me who only contributes once every few months with small PRs since I forget the contributing guidelines. Now I can get instant feedback on my PR without waiting for a maintainer to tell me I did it wrong 😄

[Trott]

Just wanted to pop in and say, Thank you! 🎉

This is great for someone like me who only contributes once every few months with small PRs since I forget the contributing guidelines. Now I can get instant feedback on my PR without waiting for a maintainer to tell me I did it wrong 😄

It's easier for the maintainers too. EVERYBODY WINS!!!11!!!!1!