You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

315 lines
10 KiB

name: CI/PR
on: [push, pull_request]
env:
DEVELOPER: 1
jobs:
ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master, you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to mention the wasted CPU). This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing. There have been a few alternatives discussed: One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But these are frustrating and error-prone to use: - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on", and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on", you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate your pushes with an extra refspec. By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree. There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion. I'll summarize here: - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the context of a normal git.git tree. - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to make changes. - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone, which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with your config changes on top. - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our partial-clone to set more outputs. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
5 years ago
ci-config:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
outputs:
enabled: ${{ steps.check-ref.outputs.enabled }}
steps:
- name: try to clone ci-config branch
continue-on-error: true
run: |
git -c protocol.version=2 clone \
--no-tags \
--single-branch \
-b ci-config \
--depth 1 \
--no-checkout \
--filter=blob:none \
https://github.com/${{ github.repository }} \
config-repo &&
cd config-repo &&
git checkout HEAD -- ci/config
- id: check-ref
name: check whether CI is enabled for ref
run: |
enabled=yes
if test -x config-repo/ci/config/allow-ref &&
! config-repo/ci/config/allow-ref '${{ github.ref }}'
then
enabled=no
fi
echo "::set-output name=enabled::$enabled"
ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master, you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to mention the wasted CPU). This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing. There have been a few alternatives discussed: One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But these are frustrating and error-prone to use: - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on", and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on", you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate your pushes with an extra refspec. By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree. There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion. I'll summarize here: - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the context of a normal git.git tree. - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to make changes. - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone, which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with your config changes on top. - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our partial-clone to set more outputs. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
5 years ago
windows-build:
ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master, you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to mention the wasted CPU). This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing. There have been a few alternatives discussed: One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But these are frustrating and error-prone to use: - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on", and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on", you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate your pushes with an extra refspec. By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree. There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion. I'll summarize here: - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the context of a normal git.git tree. - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to make changes. - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone, which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with your config changes on top. - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our partial-clone to set more outputs. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
5 years ago
needs: ci-config
if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
runs-on: windows-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v1
- name: download git-sdk-64-minimal
shell: bash
run: |
## Get artifact
urlbase=https://dev.azure.com/git-for-windows/git/_apis/build/builds
id=$(curl "$urlbase?definitions=22&statusFilter=completed&resultFilter=succeeded&\$top=1" |
jq -r ".value[] | .id")
download_url="$(curl "$urlbase/$id/artifacts" |
jq -r '.value[] | select(.name == "git-sdk-64-minimal").resource.downloadUrl')"
curl --connect-timeout 10 --retry 5 --retry-delay 0 --retry-max-time 240 \
-o artifacts.zip "$download_url"
## Unzip and remove the artifact
unzip artifacts.zip
rm artifacts.zip
- name: build
shell: powershell
env:
HOME: ${{runner.workspace}}
MSYSTEM: MINGW64
NO_PERL: 1
run: |
& .\git-sdk-64-minimal\usr\bin\bash.exe -lc @"
printf '%s\n' /git-sdk-64-minimal/ >>.git/info/exclude
ci/make-test-artifacts.sh artifacts
"@
- name: upload build artifacts
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v1
with:
name: windows-artifacts
path: artifacts
- name: upload git-sdk-64-minimal
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v1
with:
name: git-sdk-64-minimal
path: git-sdk-64-minimal
windows-test:
runs-on: windows-latest
needs: [windows-build]
strategy:
matrix:
nr: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v1
- name: download build artifacts
uses: actions/download-artifact@v1
with:
name: windows-artifacts
path: ${{github.workspace}}
- name: extract build artifacts
shell: bash
run: tar xf artifacts.tar.gz
- name: download git-sdk-64-minimal
uses: actions/download-artifact@v1
with:
name: git-sdk-64-minimal
path: ${{github.workspace}}/git-sdk-64-minimal/
- name: test
shell: powershell
run: |
& .\git-sdk-64-minimal\usr\bin\bash.exe -lc @"
# Let Git ignore the SDK
printf '%s\n' /git-sdk-64-minimal/ >>.git/info/exclude
ci/run-test-slice.sh ${{matrix.nr}} 10
"@
- name: ci/print-test-failures.sh
if: failure()
shell: powershell
run: |
& .\git-sdk-64-minimal\usr\bin\bash.exe -lc ci/print-test-failures.sh
- name: Upload failed tests' directories
if: failure() && env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS != ''
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v1
with:
name: failed-tests-windows
path: ${{env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS}}
vs-build:
ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master, you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to mention the wasted CPU). This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing. There have been a few alternatives discussed: One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But these are frustrating and error-prone to use: - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on", and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on", you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate your pushes with an extra refspec. By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree. There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion. I'll summarize here: - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the context of a normal git.git tree. - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to make changes. - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone, which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with your config changes on top. - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our partial-clone to set more outputs. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
5 years ago
needs: ci-config
if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
env:
MSYSTEM: MINGW64
NO_PERL: 1
GIT_CONFIG_PARAMETERS: "'user.name=CI' 'user.email=ci@git'"
runs-on: windows-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v1
- name: download git-sdk-64-minimal
shell: bash
run: |
## Get artifact
urlbase=https://dev.azure.com/git-for-windows/git/_apis/build/builds
id=$(curl "$urlbase?definitions=22&statusFilter=completed&resultFilter=succeeded&\$top=1" |
jq -r ".value[] | .id")
download_url="$(curl "$urlbase/$id/artifacts" |
jq -r '.value[] | select(.name == "git-sdk-64-minimal").resource.downloadUrl')"
curl --connect-timeout 10 --retry 5 --retry-delay 0 --retry-max-time 240 \
-o artifacts.zip "$download_url"
## Unzip and remove the artifact
unzip artifacts.zip
rm artifacts.zip
- name: download vcpkg artifacts
shell: powershell
run: |
$urlbase = "https://dev.azure.com/git/git/_apis/build/builds"
$id = ((Invoke-WebRequest -UseBasicParsing "${urlbase}?definitions=9&statusFilter=completed&resultFilter=succeeded&`$top=1").content | ConvertFrom-JSON).value[0].id
$downloadUrl = ((Invoke-WebRequest -UseBasicParsing "${urlbase}/$id/artifacts").content | ConvertFrom-JSON).value[0].resource.downloadUrl
(New-Object Net.WebClient).DownloadFile($downloadUrl, "compat.zip")
Expand-Archive compat.zip -DestinationPath . -Force
Remove-Item compat.zip
- name: add msbuild to PATH
uses: microsoft/setup-msbuild@v1.0.0
- name: copy dlls to root
shell: powershell
run: |
& compat\vcbuild\vcpkg_copy_dlls.bat release
if (!$?) { exit(1) }
- name: generate Visual Studio solution
shell: bash
run: |
cmake `pwd`/contrib/buildsystems/ -DCMAKE_PREFIX_PATH=`pwd`/compat/vcbuild/vcpkg/installed/x64-windows \
-DIconv_LIBRARY=`pwd`/compat/vcbuild/vcpkg/installed/x64-windows/lib/libiconv.lib -DIconv_INCLUDE_DIR=`pwd`/compat/vcbuild/vcpkg/installed/x64-windows/include \
-DMSGFMT_EXE=`pwd`/git-sdk-64-minimal/mingw64/bin/msgfmt.exe -DPERL_TESTS=OFF -DPYTHON_TESTS=OFF -DCURL_NO_CURL_CMAKE=ON
- name: MSBuild
run: msbuild git.sln -property:Configuration=Release -property:Platform=x64 -maxCpuCount:4 -property:PlatformToolset=v142
- name: bundle artifact tar
shell: powershell
env:
MSVC: 1
VCPKG_ROOT: ${{github.workspace}}\compat\vcbuild\vcpkg
run: |
& git-sdk-64-minimal\usr\bin\bash.exe -lc @"
mkdir -p artifacts &&
eval \"`$(make -n artifacts-tar INCLUDE_DLLS_IN_ARTIFACTS=YesPlease ARTIFACTS_DIRECTORY=artifacts 2>&1 | grep ^tar)\"
"@
- name: upload build artifacts
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v1
with:
name: vs-artifacts
path: artifacts
vs-test:
runs-on: windows-latest
needs: [vs-build, windows-build]
strategy:
matrix:
nr: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v1
- name: download git-sdk-64-minimal
uses: actions/download-artifact@v1
with:
name: git-sdk-64-minimal
path: ${{github.workspace}}/git-sdk-64-minimal/
- name: download build artifacts
uses: actions/download-artifact@v1
with:
name: vs-artifacts
path: ${{github.workspace}}
- name: extract build artifacts
shell: bash
run: tar xf artifacts.tar.gz
- name: test
shell: powershell
env:
MSYSTEM: MINGW64
NO_SVN_TESTS: 1
GIT_TEST_SKIP_REBASE_P: 1
run: |
& .\git-sdk-64-minimal\usr\bin\bash.exe -lc @"
# Let Git ignore the SDK and the test-cache
printf '%s\n' /git-sdk-64-minimal/ /test-cache/ >>.git/info/exclude
ci/run-test-slice.sh ${{matrix.nr}} 10
"@
- name: ci/print-test-failures.sh
if: failure()
shell: powershell
run: |
& .\git-sdk-64-minimal\usr\bin\bash.exe -lc ci/print-test-failures.sh
- name: Upload failed tests' directories
if: failure() && env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS != ''
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v1
with:
name: failed-tests-windows
path: ${{env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS}}
regular:
ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master, you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to mention the wasted CPU). This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing. There have been a few alternatives discussed: One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But these are frustrating and error-prone to use: - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on", and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on", you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate your pushes with an extra refspec. By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree. There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion. I'll summarize here: - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the context of a normal git.git tree. - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to make changes. - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone, which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with your config changes on top. - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our partial-clone to set more outputs. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
5 years ago
needs: ci-config
if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
strategy:
matrix:
vector:
- jobname: linux-clang
cc: clang
pool: ubuntu-latest
- jobname: linux-gcc
cc: gcc
pool: ubuntu-latest
- jobname: osx-clang
cc: clang
pool: macos-latest
- jobname: osx-gcc
cc: gcc
pool: macos-latest
- jobname: GETTEXT_POISON
cc: gcc
pool: ubuntu-latest
env:
CC: ${{matrix.vector.cc}}
jobname: ${{matrix.vector.jobname}}
runs-on: ${{matrix.vector.pool}}
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v1
- run: ci/install-dependencies.sh
- run: ci/run-build-and-tests.sh
- run: ci/print-test-failures.sh
if: failure()
- name: Upload failed tests' directories
if: failure() && env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS != ''
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v1
with:
name: failed-tests-${{matrix.vector.jobname}}
path: ${{env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS}}
dockerized:
ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master, you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to mention the wasted CPU). This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing. There have been a few alternatives discussed: One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But these are frustrating and error-prone to use: - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on", and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on", you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate your pushes with an extra refspec. By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree. There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion. I'll summarize here: - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the context of a normal git.git tree. - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to make changes. - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone, which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with your config changes on top. - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our partial-clone to set more outputs. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
5 years ago
needs: ci-config
if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
strategy:
matrix:
vector:
- jobname: linux-musl
image: alpine
- jobname: Linux32
image: daald/ubuntu32:xenial
env:
jobname: ${{matrix.vector.jobname}}
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
container: ${{matrix.vector.image}}
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v1
- run: ci/install-docker-dependencies.sh
- run: ci/run-build-and-tests.sh
- run: ci/print-test-failures.sh
if: failure()
- name: Upload failed tests' directories
if: failure() && env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS != ''
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v1
with:
name: failed-tests-${{matrix.vector.jobname}}
path: ${{env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS}}
static-analysis:
ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master, you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to mention the wasted CPU). This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing. There have been a few alternatives discussed: One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But these are frustrating and error-prone to use: - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on", and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on", you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate your pushes with an extra refspec. By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree. There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion. I'll summarize here: - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the context of a normal git.git tree. - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to make changes. - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone, which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with your config changes on top. - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our partial-clone to set more outputs. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
5 years ago
needs: ci-config
if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
env:
jobname: StaticAnalysis
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v1
- run: ci/install-dependencies.sh
- run: ci/run-static-analysis.sh
documentation:
ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master, you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to mention the wasted CPU). This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing. There have been a few alternatives discussed: One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But these are frustrating and error-prone to use: - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on", and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on", you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate your pushes with an extra refspec. By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree. There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion. I'll summarize here: - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the context of a normal git.git tree. - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to make changes. - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone, which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with your config changes on top. - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our partial-clone to set more outputs. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
5 years ago
needs: ci-config
if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
env:
jobname: Documentation
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v1
- run: ci/install-dependencies.sh
- run: ci/test-documentation.sh