Re: [dpdk-ci] query about Travis CI running status

[Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>]

Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> writes:

> <snip>
>
> Thanks for keeping this off the list, I was not comfortable discussing things on the list 😊
>
>  
>
>> 
>
>> Hello,
>
>> 
>
>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 3:18 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
>
>> <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>
>> > > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 8:28 AM Ruifeng Wang
>
>> > > > <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>
>
>> > > > wrote:
>
>> > > > > Can you tell whether Travis CI is still running or have been disabled?
>
>> > > > >
>
>> > > > > It seems there is no Travis build since Dec 16, 2020.
>
>> > > > > https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/builds
>
>> > > > >
>
>> > > > > I think now DPDK can use Travis CI as usual as a result of Arm’s
>
>> > > > communication with Travis.
>
>> > > > > DPDK should be on a whitelist and free from credit issue.
>
>> > > >
>
>> > > > Can you share details on this?
>
>> > > > Do you mean the main DPDK/dpdk repo gets free credits?
>
>> > It is the main repo: https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk
>
>> 
>
>> I re-enabled a weekly build in the cron settings and set the "build on push"
>
>> option for the main repository DPDK/dpdk.
>
>> Travis started one build for the weekly schedule, which got cancelled with
>
>> "Owner DPDK does not have enough credits.".
>
>> I then merged a simple fix in the main repo, Travis triggered a job which got
>
>> cancelled with the same message.
>
>> 
>
>> So I disabled all of Travis jobs again for DPDK/dpdk (no weekly build, no build on
>
>> push).
>
>> 
>
>> 
>
>> > > > Or the ovsrobot/DPDK? or both?
>
>> > This was not requested. Which one do we need?
>
>> 
>
>> I'd like to hear about others but for me, ovsrobot/dpdk is the more important
>
>> (and the more credits-hungry btw).
>
>> DPDK/dpdk is a bonus.
>
>> 
>
>> 
>
>> > > > What of other individual's forks?
>
>> > I have not discussed this.
>
>> > Is this required? May be at least for the maintainers?
>
>> 
>
>> I wanted to know what had been discussed/agreed with Travis.
>
>> This is not required, but nice for contributors.
>
> I definitely agree, this is good to have. The discussion has been happening between Arm Ecosystem development team and
> Travis. So, info on how things are implemented is scarce. I had provided the link to DPDK/dpdk github and it was supposed
> to be on the 'allow list' and being monitored by Travis Support to ensure that credits are getting topped off. I will pass this
> email to our team and see what they say.
>
>  
>
> We are also working on getting Arm owned GitLab instance integrated. It should happen in the next 3 months (there are
> other projects too which are affected). I had planned for DPDK/dpdk, but I will change it to ovsrobot/dpdk. I will check to see
> if we can provide access to maintainers. This will be a permanent solution.

That's good to know.  We have been discussing internally what to do when
Github Actions inevitably goes the same way as Travis (pay $$$ or no
builds), and I'm happy to hear that you have a permanent solution in
mind.

>  
>
>> 
>
>> 
>
>> >
>
>> > >
>
>> > > Sorry I don't know how the whitelist works in detail. Need to check
>
>> > > and get back.
>
>> > > Just wanted to know if Travis CI had chance to run.
>
>> > >
>
>> > > >
>
>> > > > >
>
>> > > > > Just want to know if it works as expected.
>
>> > > >
>
>> > > > From the webui, I still see a complaint on missing credits for
>
>> > > > DPDK/dpdk and ovsrobot/dpdk, but I can't tell if this warning is
>
>> > > > linked to my
>
>> > > account.
>
>> > Can you please provide a link to this?
>
>> 
>
>> You can see here:
>
>> https://travis-ci.com/github/DPDK/dpdk/requests
>
>> https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/requests
>
>> 
>
>> 
>
>> --
>
>> David Marchand