Use deployment primitives from travis #843

guilhem · 2016-11-14T16:45:04Z

Need advice on this.
I may go further to improve building

errm · 2016-11-14T18:36:00Z

This looks good to me

ping @containous/traefik

errm · 2016-11-16T03:50:53Z

Needs a rebase

guilhem · 2016-11-17T15:52:09Z

@errm if you are talking about multi-commit, maintainers can merge by squashing commits ;)

errm · 2016-11-17T17:25:36Z

No just the branch was stale...

emilevauge · 2016-11-29T18:03:04Z

Ping @containous/traefik, we need a review on this ;)

vdemeester · 2016-12-01T13:44:08Z

@guilhem needs a rebase. How could we test that though ?

emilevauge · 2016-12-05T10:16:02Z

@guilhem are you sure that the behavior is the same in the case of a pull request (deploy-pr.sh removed) ?

errm · 2016-12-08T10:54:15Z

Yeah looks like the behaviour from deploy-pr.sh is not replicated, can we add that back in please @guilhem ?

guilhem · 2016-12-08T14:41:24Z

@errm @emilevauge Yes, I didn't replicated deploy-pr.sh because it's just simply not working :)

https://travis-ci.org/containous/traefik/jobs/181516876#L1946
https://travis-ci.org/containous/traefik/jobs/181516879#L1949

emilevauge · 2016-12-16T09:02:44Z

@guilhem it is https://travis-ci.org/containous/traefik/jobs/183995719#L2089 ;)

guilhem · 2016-12-16T11:29:09Z

humm...
So I have to fix it ^^

guilhem · 2016-12-16T13:19:49Z

@emilevauge I think I've found the problem.
Only PR done by you (or people with write access) have this feature working because of this: https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/pull-requests#Pull-Requests-and-Security-Restrictions

emilevauge · 2016-12-16T13:23:29Z

@guilhem
#936
https://travis-ci.org/containous/traefik/jobs/182236245#L2087

guilhem · 2016-12-16T13:27:44Z

@emilevauge but https://travis-ci.org/containous/traefik/jobs/182320106#L2085 fail :)

Travis Job you point was after merging so inside a "secure" branch (master)

guilhem · 2016-12-16T13:30:12Z

But maybe we want to have a rolling docker for each commit pushed inside "master"

emilevauge · 2016-12-16T13:34:21Z

Yes, check the merge build, not the pull request build: https://travis-ci.org/containous/traefik/jobs/182236245#L2087

guilhem · 2016-12-16T18:02:56Z

@emilevauge should be ok. Plus:

speed improved
right docker version tested

emilevauge · 2016-12-20T11:16:53Z

@guilhem I don't think creating a Docker image by commit is a good idea. Usually, we need to atomically take the whole pull request to get it working. Could you rollback to the old behavior?

guilhem · 2016-12-20T11:19:13Z

@emilevauge docker image is pushed not by commit, but with "latest" commit (the merged if there is one).

emilevauge · 2016-12-20T11:20:46Z

Oops, you right ;)

guilhem · 2016-12-23T13:28:33Z

gentleping @containous/traefik

vdemeester

LGTM 🐸
@guilhem could you rebase and squash your commits 👼

guilhem · 2017-01-05T14:25:37Z

@vdemeester done :)

emilevauge · 2017-01-06T14:17:37Z

@guilhem do you know why tests are failing ?

guilhem · 2017-01-06T14:51:09Z

@emilevauge no idea. can you try to re-run failing tests?

emilevauge · 2017-01-06T17:09:52Z

@guilhem I relaunch the tests 2 times and still the same result :'(

guilhem · 2017-01-09T18:53:04Z

@emilevauge I think bug come from github.com/libkermit/compose or github.com/docker/libcompose or association of it.
Test for docker 1.10 are ok but compose is failing with docker 1.9
It's quite hard to update dependencies between all this projects as it's used by traefik and traefik/integration and they are different packages.

Solutions can be:

remove docker 1.9 support (it's not really tested with current setup).
To include integrations test in same sources and use flag matching

guilhem · 2017-01-09T20:10:41Z

it works with docker 1.10 and 1.12

emilevauge · 2017-01-10T12:33:03Z

@guilhem we agree with @vdemeester to remove Docker 1.9 support :)

guilhem · 2017-01-18T16:14:22Z

@emilevauge I'm in holiday right now, but I will do this for Monday before meetup ;)

vdemeester · 2017-01-23T11:09:32Z

.travis.yml

+  fast_finish: true
+  include:
+  - env: DOCKER_VERSION=1.10.3
+  - env: DOCKER_VERSION=1.12.5


Should be 1.12.6 👼
We could also add 1.13.0 but let's do that in a follow-up 👼

guilhem · 2017-01-23T14:53:48Z

@vdemeester rebased, squashed, fixed etc
:)

guilhem · 2017-01-23T15:19:44Z

FAIL: basic_test.go:76: SimpleSuite.TestPrintHelp
basic_test.go:89:
    c.Assert(string(output), checker.Contains, "Usage:")
... obtained string = ""
... substring string = "Usage:"

only on 1 environment that was working before :(

emilevauge · 2017-01-23T16:41:22Z

@vdemeester, any idea on what's going on here ?

vdemeester · 2017-01-23T17:52:23Z

Hum I don't see in the failed build but it might be a weirdiness with how the test is written — if the run is particularly slow it might fail 😓 . I'll take a look.

emilevauge

OMG it's green 🙄

OSS is 10% inspiration, 90% restarting failed CI builds until they randomly work

— Nolan Lawson https://twitter.com/nolanlawson/status/802309792349855744

LGTM
Thanks a lot @guilhem 👍

errm added status/2-needs-review kind/enhancement a new or improved feature. contributor/needs-resolve-conflicts labels Nov 14, 2016

errm removed the contributor/needs-resolve-conflicts label Nov 17, 2016

vdemeester self-assigned this Nov 23, 2016

vdemeester reviewed Dec 30, 2016

View reviewed changes

vdemeester reviewed Jan 23, 2017

View reviewed changes

Use deployment primitives from travis

8e4c4f8

emilevauge approved these changes Jan 24, 2017

View reviewed changes

emilevauge merged commit fad3038 into traefik:master Jan 24, 2017

emilevauge mentioned this pull request Jan 25, 2017

Fix travis script #1067

Merged

ldez removed the status/2-needs-review label Apr 29, 2017

ldez added this to the 1.2 milestone Oct 1, 2017

Use deployment primitives from travis #843

Use deployment primitives from travis #843

Conversation

guilhem commented Nov 14, 2016

errm commented Nov 14, 2016

errm commented Nov 16, 2016

guilhem commented Nov 17, 2016 • edited Loading

errm commented Nov 17, 2016

emilevauge commented Nov 29, 2016

vdemeester commented Dec 1, 2016

emilevauge commented Dec 5, 2016

errm commented Dec 8, 2016 • edited Loading

guilhem commented Dec 8, 2016

emilevauge commented Dec 16, 2016

guilhem commented Dec 16, 2016

guilhem commented Dec 16, 2016

emilevauge commented Dec 16, 2016

guilhem commented Dec 16, 2016 • edited Loading

guilhem commented Dec 16, 2016

emilevauge commented Dec 16, 2016

guilhem commented Dec 16, 2016

emilevauge commented Dec 20, 2016

guilhem commented Dec 20, 2016

emilevauge commented Dec 20, 2016

guilhem commented Dec 23, 2016

vdemeester left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

guilhem commented Jan 5, 2017

emilevauge commented Jan 6, 2017

guilhem commented Jan 6, 2017

emilevauge commented Jan 6, 2017

guilhem commented Jan 9, 2017

guilhem commented Jan 9, 2017

emilevauge commented Jan 10, 2017

guilhem commented Jan 18, 2017

vdemeester Jan 23, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

guilhem commented Jan 23, 2017

guilhem commented Jan 23, 2017 • edited Loading

emilevauge commented Jan 23, 2017

vdemeester commented Jan 23, 2017

emilevauge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

guilhem commented Nov 17, 2016 •

edited

Loading

errm commented Dec 8, 2016 •

edited

Loading

guilhem commented Dec 16, 2016 •

edited

Loading

guilhem commented Jan 23, 2017 •

edited

Loading