Hi!
http://qa.php.net/ refers to http://ci.qa.php.net/, but the latter
appears to be unavailable. It seems the site was about Jenkins CI – has
it been superseeded by Travis and Appveyor? If so, qa.php.net should be
updated.
--
Christoph M. Becker
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:34 AM, Christoph M. Becker cmbecker69@gmx.de
wrote:
Hi!
http://qa.php.net/ refers to http://ci.qa.php.net/, but the latter
appears to be unavailable. It seems the site was about Jenkins CI – has
it been superseeded by Travis and Appveyor? If so, qa.php.net should be
updated.--
Christoph M. Becker--
Hi,
it was mostly managed and used by me and at one point it went down and I
did not had the time to contact the provider and figure out what happened.
I'm fine with being removed or if you think that it would be useful we can
try bringing it back.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:34 AM, Christoph M. Becker cmbecker69@gmx.de
wrote:http://qa.php.net/ refers to http://ci.qa.php.net/, but the latter
appears to be unavailable. It seems the site was about Jenkins CI – has
it been superseeded by Travis and Appveyor? If so, qa.php.net should be
updated.it was mostly managed and used by me and at one point it went down and I
did not had the time to contact the provider and figure out what happened.
I'm fine with being removed or if you think that it would be useful we can
try bringing it back.
Thanks, Ferenc! I think, now that we're having Travis and Appveyor,
there's not much need for having our own Jenkins, and I think it's more
worthwhile to actually cater to the user submitted test reports.
I'll remove the ci.qa.php.net related stuff from the QA website in a few
days.
--
Christoph M. Becker
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 1:44 PM Christoph M. Becker cmbecker69@gmx.de
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:34 AM, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de
wrote:
http://qa.php.net/ refers to http://ci.qa.php.net/, but the latter
appears to be unavailable. It seems the site was about Jenkins CI – has
it been superseeded by Travis and Appveyor? If so, qa.php.net should
be
updated.it was mostly managed and used by me and at one point it went down and I
did not had the time to contact the provider and figure out what
happened.
I'm fine with being removed or if you think that it would be useful we
can
try bringing it back.Thanks, Ferenc! I think, now that we're having Travis and Appveyor,
there's not much need for having our own Jenkins, and I think it's more
worthwhile to actually cater to the user submitted test reports.I'll remove the ci.qa.php.net related stuff from the QA website in a few
days.
Hi all,
Although travis and appveyor do most of the work, I think there is still
some value in having our own Jenkins. Namely, the ability to run other test
suites for each change in the PHP repo. IIRC, the old jenkins instance was
also running the wordpress tests for every change to PHP, which can help us
find issues earlier. I have been maintaining a Jenkins instance for PHP
that you can find in https://php-ci.pmmaga.net/ with the configuration and
pipeline definitions in https://github.com/pmmaga/php-jenkins-pipelines
If anyone finds some value in having something like this and wishes to
revive our instance, I'd be glad to help setting it up. If we feel that
Travis + Appveyor are enough, that's fine too :)
Regards,
Pedro
Although travis and appveyor do most of the work, I think there is still
some value in having our own Jenkins. Namely, the ability to run other test
suites for each change in the PHP repo. IIRC, the old jenkins instance was
also running the wordpress tests for every change to PHP, which can help us
find issues earlier. I have been maintaining a Jenkins instance for PHP
that you can find in https://php-ci.pmmaga.net/ with the configuration and
pipeline definitions in https://github.com/pmmaga/php-jenkins-pipelinesIf anyone finds some value in having something like this and wishes to
revive our instance, I'd be glad to help setting it up. If we feel that
Travis + Appveyor are enough, that's fine too :)
Well, on further consideration it seems that having our own CI would be
nice, especially if we'd run further test suites or different
configurations there. On the other hand, someone would actually to have
a look at the test results, and act on failing tests. Any volunteers?
--
Christoph M. Becker
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 12:19 PM Christoph M. Becker cmbecker69@gmx.de
wrote:
If anyone finds some value in having something like this and wishes to
revive our instance, I'd be glad to help setting it up. If we feel that
Travis + Appveyor are enough, that's fine too :)Well, on further consideration it seems that having our own CI would be
nice, especially if we'd run further test suites or different
configurations there. On the other hand, someone would actually to have
a look at the test results, and act on failing tests. Any volunteers?--
Christoph M. Becker
I'd say that if we want this, then it should be integrated with github and
be a third check (next to travis and appveyor). Depending on the stability,
it could be a required or an optional check. This would be better than
expecting someone to manually check it.
Regards,
Pedro
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 12:19 PM Christoph M. Becker cmbecker69@gmx.de
wrote:If anyone finds some value in having something like this and wishes to
revive our instance, I'd be glad to help setting it up. If we feel that
Travis + Appveyor are enough, that's fine too :)Well, on further consideration it seems that having our own CI would be
nice, especially if we'd run further test suites or different
configurations there. On the other hand, someone would actually to have
a look at the test results, and act on failing tests. Any volunteers?--
Christoph M. BeckerI'd say that if we want this, then it should be integrated with github and
be a third check (next to travis and appveyor). Depending on the stability,
it could be a required or an optional check. This would be better than
expecting someone to manually check it.Regards,
Pedro
the integration part is the easiest ( all of the mainstream products are
supporting github and the pushing the build results ).
I think first we should figure out what do we want exactly, what is missing
from our current CI pipeline (more platforms, more resources, we want to be
able to log into the build environment for better debuging, etc.),
depending on the answers we can figure out if we want another SaaS offering
or to build our own and what product/tool do we want to use.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu