Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

build: add quic to github action #34336

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

gengjiawen
Copy link
Member

@gengjiawen gengjiawen commented Jul 13, 2020

Fix #33967

Now blocked by https://github.com//issues/34435.

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. label Jul 13, 2020
@gengjiawen gengjiawen requested a review from a team July 13, 2020 12:59
@gengjiawen gengjiawen added the quic Issues and PRs related to the QUIC implementation / HTTP/3. label Jul 13, 2020
@gengjiawen
Copy link
Member Author

Mac failure should resolved by #34335

Copy link
Member

@richardlau richardlau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I do not oppose testing quic with GitHub actions as long as @nodejs/quic will put in the effort to keep it green. As this PR currently stands though it is removing the testing of the default configuration.

@gengjiawen
Copy link
Member Author

As this PR currently stands though it is removing the testing of the default configuration

Need to add extra flag to make run-ci -j8 V=1 TEST_CI_ARGS="-p dots" ?

@gengjiawen gengjiawen added the blocked PRs that are blocked by other issues or PRs. label Jul 13, 2020
@richardlau
Copy link
Member

As this PR currently stands though it is removing the testing of the default configuration

Need to add extra flag to make run-ci -j8 V=1 TEST_CI_ARGS="-p dots" ?

My point is this PR changes the existing build/test workflows to add the configuration flag for quic which means we no longer build/test the non-quic (i.e. default) build configuration with actions.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Jul 14, 2020

We definitely should add a configuration to test QUIC but I'm thinking that, for now, it should be a separate action without modifying any of the existing actions.

@richardlau ... every QUIC PR should be green at this point tho issues do sneak in given the heavy development.

@gengjiawen
Copy link
Member Author

My point is this PR changes the existing build/test workflows to add the configuration flag for quic which means we no longer build/test the non-quic (i.e. default) build configuration with actions.

As far as I know, this is a superset of current build and test. And jenkins still run the old good without quic version. Any other potential problem I am not aware of ?

@richardlau
Copy link
Member

We don't require Jenkins CI runs for doc only changes. The GitHub actions are supposed to be the equivalent of the old ci-lite jobs, one of which was a build and test (in addition to the linters). This is because changes to docs may affect test cases, for example some addons tests are based on the code examples in the markdown files and I'd like to keep that with the default configuration.

@gengjiawen
Copy link
Member Author

I'd like to keep that with the default configuration.

I have not touch the test configuration. Adding experimental-quic has some impact on test case ?

@richardlau
Copy link
Member

I'd like to keep that with the default configuration.

I have not touch the test configuration. Adding experimental-quic has some impact on test case ?

Yes, the binary being tested is built with non-default configuration options.

@gengjiawen
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, the binary being tested is built with non-default configuration options.

But tbh it only add extra quic function, not removing anything or bypass test case.

If you insist on this, I can add an extra action to do this, but we will have three more github action.

Second thought ?

@richardlau
Copy link
Member

My position is that I want to keep at least one build/test action job without quic enabled since we do not require a Jenkins CI for doc-only changes. I would be okay if that was the one that is part of the "Build from tarball" workflow but it looks like that might get removed (#34440 and #34123).

I would also prefer if the name of the job name of the jobs that were quic enabled included that information (e.g. something like "test-linux / test-linux-with-quic") to indicate it's a non-default build.

@jasnell jasnell added this to Backlog in QUIC via automation Jul 22, 2020
@jasnell jasnell moved this from Backlog to In Progress in QUIC Jul 22, 2020
@richardlau richardlau dismissed their stale review July 26, 2020 15:46

Objection addressed.

@gengjiawen gengjiawen removed the blocked PRs that are blocked by other issues or PRs. label Jul 27, 2020
@gengjiawen
Copy link
Member Author

My position is that I want to keep at least one build/test action job without quic enabled since we do not require a Jenkins CI for doc-only changes. I would be okay if that was the one that is part of the "Build from tarball" workflow but it looks like that might get removed (#34440 and #34123).

I would also prefer if the name of the job name of the jobs that were quic enabled included that information (e.g. something like "test-linux / test-linux-with-quic") to indicate it's a non-default build.

Renamed pipeline and add an extra good old pipeline without quic :)

@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

gengjiawen added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2020
PR-URL: #34336
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
gengjiawen added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2020
PR-URL: #34336
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
@gengjiawen
Copy link
Member Author

Landed in 1f94b89...7a5fbaf

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. quic Issues and PRs related to the QUIC implementation / HTTP/3.
Projects
No open projects
QUIC
  
Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

enable quic in github action
5 participants