Sorry for bumping such an old thread, but I've created a github actions POC
and written it up here:
https://forum.djangoproject.com/t/improving-the-contribution-experience-with-github-actions/5964
On Monday, 11 November 2019 at 08:11:57 UTC Johannes Maron wrote:
> Hi Mariusz,
>
>
riusz Felisiak ,
wrote:
>
> > I would suggest to open a PR to GitHub now and to get the Fellows involved.
> > Ask them how to best integrate a trial without disturbing their workflow.
> > What do you guys think?
> >
>
> I'm going to play with GitHub actions i
> I would suggest to open a PR to GitHub now and to get the Fellows
> involved. Ask them how to best integrate a trial without disturbing their
> workflow. What do you guys think?
>
>
I'm going to play with GitHub actions in this week (or in the next one) but
I'm
I have some really good news! I managed to almost map our entire Jenkins suite
to GitHub actions, except Oracle.
Check out the output of the entire suite here.
And the config here: .github/workflows/ci.yml
Furthermore, I followed Tom’s great advice and switched everything to services.
The
he work already done in django-docker-box there? Then
> > this would be "Run Django CI with Docker in the Azure cloud via Github
> > Actions instead of Jenkins via the Jenkins-Github integration (plugin?)”
>
> @Matematica that sounds promising is there a PR for that, that I ha
> Then why not use all the work already done in django-docker-box there? Then
>this would be "Run Django CI with Docker in the Azure cloud via Github Actions
>instead of Jenkins via the Jenkins-Github integration (plugin?)”
@Matematica that sounds promising is there a PR for tha
ntastic! Thank you Johannes! Regarding sqlite MacOS and
>>>> Windows tests, this is historical AFAIK (we don’t have the resources). With
>>>> this we should test MacOS and Windows as part of the Sqlite matrix (i.e all
>>>> python versions).
>>>>
>
we should test MacOS and Windows as part of the Sqlite matrix (i.e all
>>> python versions).
>>>
>>> A few notes:
>>>
>>> 1. We need to change the test runner output to be verbose when running
>>> inside actions, as GitHub actions uses line buf
stic! Thank you Johannes! Regarding sqlite MacOS and
>>> Windows tests, this is historical AFAIK (we don’t have the resources). With
>>> this we should test MacOS and Windows as part of the Sqlite matrix (i.e all
>>> python versions).
>>>
>>> A few notes:
&g
to change the test runner output to be verbose when running
>> inside actions, as GitHub actions uses line buffered output.
>>
> Yes, 100%
>
>>
>> 2. We can’t run Oracle in actions for a number of reasons. We could
>> consider exposing the test database instance to
on
>> versions).
>>
>> A few notes:
>>
>> 1. We need to change the test runner output to be verbose when running
>> inside actions, as GitHub actions uses line buffered output.
>>
> Yes, 100%
>
>>
>> 2. We can’t run Oracle in actions for
don’t have the resources). With this we
> should test MacOS and Windows as part of the Sqlite matrix (i.e all python
> versions).
>
> A few notes:
>
> 1. We need to change the test runner output to be verbose when running
> inside actions, as GitHub actions uses line buffe
to be verbose when running inside
actions, as GitHub actions uses line buffered output.
2. We can’t run Oracle in actions for a number of reasons. We could consider
exposing the test database instance to Github actions via a proxy or a
whitelisted IP address, and we could implement the current
, as always, our fiat and the expenditure of it is what counts. To
>> that end I would honestly avoid self hosting runners, there are some easier
>> alternatives we can try first to support Oracle.
>>
>> Anyway, I will make the flake8 merge request tomorrow and we can see
>&
I put in a little effort and tried a couple of conceptual things.
1. YAML anchors, inheritance and includes are not yet supported by GitHub
actions.
2. You can build dependent builds, or build stages, but you will need to
keep everything in one file. (This gets messy without anchors & co
> > Hey Shai.
> > > >
> > > > On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 08:43:21 UTC+1, Shai Berger wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there benefit enough in GitHub Actions (over Jenkins) to justify a
> > > > > move from an open-source based s
await for an open source solution?
How open is our current solution really? Jenkins is, but our configuration
isn't. I'd personally prefer to have open configuration of an open system.
That being said, most of GitHub actions is open source.
3. Server capacity and concurrency.
I think
AM Carlton Gibson
>> wrote:
>> Hey Shai.
>>
>>> On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 08:43:21 UTC+1, Shai Berger wrote:
>>>
>>> Is there benefit enough in GitHub Actions (over Jenkins) to justify a
>>> move from an open-source based solution?
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 3:51 AM Carlton Gibson
wrote:
> Hey Shai.
>
> On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 08:43:21 UTC+1, Shai Berger wrote:
>>
>>
>> Is there benefit enough in GitHub Actions (over Jenkins) to justify a
>> move from an open-source based solution?
>
On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 4:48:11 PM UTC+1, Tom Forbes wrote:
>
> The usage limits are documented here:
> https://help.github.com/en/github/automating-your-workflow-with-github-actions/about-github-actions#usage-limits.
>
> I’m not sure how they apply to organisati
Here it is:
https://github.com/orf/django-github-actions/tree/master/.github/workflows
<https://github.com/orf/django-github-actions/tree/master/.github/workflows>
There are two actions I’ve added here: a lint step and a matrix of sqlite tests
(Windows, MacOS and Ubuntu * py36 and py37)
merge requests.
Regarding Jenkins: it’s a beast that’s often unreliable. We save on effort
there, get a more reliable CI tool and have our CI files versioned alongside
our code.
I’m not sure open vs closed source comes into play here, and it should be
mentioned that Github actions (the steps
Right, but there has to be some changes done i think.
On Wed 6 Nov, 2019, 6:05 PM Florian Apolloner,
wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 8:43:21 AM UTC+1, Shai Berger wrote:
>>
>> Is there benefit enough in GitHub Actions (over Jenkins) to justify a
>> mov
Can we use pythongui library for that and then use selenium for testing .
On Wed 6 Nov, 2019, 2:21 PM Carlton Gibson,
wrote:
> Hey Shai.
>
> On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 08:43:21 UTC+1, Shai Berger wrote:
>>
>>
>> Is there benefit enough in GitHub Actions (over Je
On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 8:43:21 AM UTC+1, Shai Berger wrote:
>
> Is there benefit enough in GitHub Actions (over Jenkins) to justify a
> move from an open-source based solution?
>
Yes, less server costs (even if sponsored). Less things to maintain for us
(Jenkin
Hey Shai.
On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 08:43:21 UTC+1, Shai Berger wrote:
>
>
> Is there benefit enough in GitHub Actions (over Jenkins) to justify a
> move from an open-source based solution?
>
I don't think we have to move away entirely but it would be good to brin
On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:35:24 -0800 (PST)
Florian Apolloner wrote:
>
> Ui, seems like we can start using our own runners:
> https://github.blog/2019-11-05-self-hosted-runners-for-github-actions-is-now-in-beta/
>
> -- seems like github actions is becoming more and more a jenkins
ur own runners:
https://github.blog/2019-11-05-self-hosted-runners-for-github-actions-is-now-in-beta/
-- seems like github actions is becoming more and more a jenkins
replacement :D
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contr
re action-like in another way, we maybe should split the two and
just share settings files? All in all I'd like to use docker-box is
feasible.
3. Will the standard github actions concurrency handle the number of builds
> we put through it in a reasonable time?
>
Good question, we can a
Nice, I've been playing with GitHub actions and I'm impressed. Will move my
projects over from Travis at some point. Thanks for your work Tom
(Likewise on side note - I did not see Johannes' first message)
On Thu, 31 Oct 2019 at 10:08, Tom Forbes wrote:
>
>
&g
suite running on actions.
There are a few open questions:
1. How do we support Oracle?
2. Can we (or do we want to?) unify it somehow with docker-box?
3. Will the standard github actions concurrency handle the number of builds we
put through it in a reasonable time?
I’ve been experimenting with
I think Tom Forbes started working on it already, you might wanna sync up
with him: https://github.com/orf/django-github-actions
On Thursday, October 31, 2019 at 10:40:47 AM UTC+1, Johannes Hoppe wrote:
>
> I would love to give Selenium a try. O god I hate it when selenium tests
> just
1, 2019 at 10:30:10 AM UTC+1, Johannes Hoppe wrote:
>>
>> Hey there,
>>
>> I saw that GitHub actions are already enabled for the Django organization.
>> Since general availability was announced starting Nov. 13. by GitHub, I
>> wonder, should we use it?
>>
&
there,
>
> I saw that GitHub actions are already enabled for the Django organization.
> Since general availability was announced starting Nov. 13. by GitHub, I
> wonder, should we use it?
>
> I know we have a very complicated build setup, but maybe it makes sense to
> move some ch
34 matches
Mail list logo
