Граф коммитов

4 Коммитов

Автор SHA1 Сообщение Дата
Johannes Schindelin f72f328bc5 ci: let GitHub Actions upload failed tests' directories
Arguably, CI builds' most important task is to not only identify
regressions, but to make it as easy as possible to investigate what went
wrong.

In that light, we will want to provide users with a way to inspect the
tests' output as well as the corresponding directories.

This commit adds build steps that are only executed when tests failed,
uploading the relevant information as build artifacts. These artifacts
can then be downloaded by interested parties to diagnose the failures
more efficiently.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-10 10:30:40 -07:00
Đoàn Trần Công Danh 889cacb689 ci: configure GitHub Actions for CI/PR
This patch adds CI builds via GitHub Actions. While the underlying
technology is at least _very_ similar to that of Azure Pipelines, GitHub
Actions are much easier to set up than Azure Pipelines:

- no need to install a GitHub App,

- no need to set up an Azure DevOps account,

- all you need to do is push to your fork on GitHub.

Therefore, it makes a lot of sense for us to have a working GitHub
Actions setup.

While copy/editing `azure-pipelines.yml` into
`.github/workflows/main.yml`, we also use the opportunity to accelerate
the step that sets up a minimal subset of Git for Windows' SDK in the
Windows-build job:

- we now download a `.tar.xz` stored in Azure Blobs and extract it
  simultaneously by calling `curl` and piping the result to `tar`,

- decompressing via `xz`,

- all three utilities are installed together with Git for Windows

At the same time, we also make use of the matrix build feature, which
reduces the amount of repeated text by quite a bit.

Also, we do away with the parts that try to mount a file share on which
`prove` can store data between runs. It is just too complicated to set
up, and most times the tree changes anyway, so there is little return on
investment there.

Initial-patch-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-10 10:30:40 -07:00
Jeff King c3a7dd70c4 point pull requesters to GitGitGadget
In the contributing guide and PR template seen by people who open pull
requests on GitHub, we mention the submitGit tool, which gives an
alternative to figuring out the mailing list. These days we also have
the similar GitGitGadget tool, and we should make it clear that this
is also an option.

We could continue to mention _both_ tools, but it's probably better to
pick one in order to avoid overwhelming the user with choice. After all,
one of the purposes here is to reduce friction for first-time or
infrequent contributors. And there are a few reasons to prefer GGG:

  1. submitGit seems to still have a few rough edges. E.g., it doesn't
     munge timestamps to help threaded mail readers handled out-of-order
     delivery.

  2. Subjectively, GGG seems to be more commonly used on the list these
     days, especially by list regulars.

  3. GGG seems to be under more active development (likely related to
     point 2).

So let's actually swap out submitGit for GGG. While we're there, let's
put another link to the GGG page in the PR template, because that's
where users who are learning about it for the first time will want to go
to read more.

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-03-13 11:07:50 +09:00
Lars Schneider 0b1bb0c032 Configure Git contribution guidelines for github.com
Many open source projects use github.com for their contribution process.
Although we mirror the Git core repository to github.com [1] we do not
use any other github.com service. This is unknown/unexpected to a
number of (potential) contributors and consequently they create Pull
Requests against our mirror with their contributions. These Pull
Requests become stale. This is frustrating to them as they think we
ignore them and it is also unsatisfactory for us as we miss potential
code improvements and/or new contributors.

GitHub contribution guidelines and a GitHub Pull Request template that
is visible to every Pull Request creator can be configured with special
files in a Git repository [2]. Let's make use of this!

[1] https://github.com/git/git
[2] https://help.github.com/articles/creating-a-pull-request-template-for-your-repository/

Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-13 08:41:47 -07:00