doc:Travis CI note on Build Timeouts #17424

pull RandyMcMillan wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from RandyMcMillan:travis-note changing 1 files +1 −1
  1. RandyMcMillan commented at 1:10 AM on November 9, 2019: contributor

    Related to #17420

    Added developer note to minimize issues related to Travis CI accounts.

  2. DrahtBot added the label Docs on Nov 9, 2019
  3. in doc/developer-notes.md:464 in 16ff157001 outdated
     460 | @@ -461,6 +461,8 @@ General Bitcoin Core
     461 |    - *Explanation*: If the test suite is to be updated for a change, this has to
     462 |      be done first.
     463 |  
     464 | +  - ***Developers using their own Travis CI account*** to pretest their commits should work off of a recent master that is passing. This ensures that your work is based on a passing version and any fails are contained within your commit. ***You may have to restart your builds. See: [Build Timeouts](https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/customizing-the-build#build-timeouts)***
    


    laanwj commented at 11:52 AM on November 9, 2019:

    Adding *** around this is overkill, it is not significantly more important than the other recommendations. Please format this like the other items.

  4. fanquake added the label Waiting for author on Nov 9, 2019
  5. MarcoFalke commented at 1:43 PM on November 9, 2019: member

    Please add this documentation to the existing one in the .travis.yml. It is not relevant for anyone not using travis.

  6. RandyMcMillan commented at 6:05 PM on November 9, 2019: contributor

    I appreciate the feedback - thank you.

  7. DrahtBot added the label Needs rebase on Nov 10, 2019
  8. DrahtBot removed the label Needs rebase on Nov 10, 2019
  9. doc:Travis CI note on Build Timeouts 266c979405
  10. laanwj commented at 1:15 PM on November 10, 2019: member

    Please add this documentation to the existing one in the .travis.yml. It is not relevant for anyone not using travis.

    Arguably that particular item in the developer notes "Make sure pull requests pass Travis CI before merging." is about Travis. But ok, better to put the documentation closer to where someone might notice it.

    This collides 100% with #17420 now, though. Would be better to review that and suggest improvements there.

  11. MarcoFalke commented at 1:52 PM on November 10, 2019: member

    developer notes "Make sure pull requests pass Travis CI before merging."

    That should probably be removed then.

  12. laanwj commented at 2:30 PM on November 10, 2019: member

    Or remove "Travis". it's still important to have the CI passing before merge, to prevent it from failing on the branch. As is happening for Appveyor, yet again.

  13. MarcoFalke commented at 3:18 AM on November 11, 2019: member

    As with the appveyor failure right now, there is often no way for a contributor to make sure the ci passes. The issue might be unrelated to their changes.

    It should probably say that the unit and functional tests should pass locally.

  14. DrahtBot commented at 4:58 AM on November 11, 2019: member

    <!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->

    The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

    <!--174a7506f384e20aa4161008e828411d-->

    Conflicts

    Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

    • #17420 (travis: Rework CACHE_ERR_MSG by MarcoFalke)

    If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

  15. RandyMcMillan commented at 7:05 PM on November 11, 2019: contributor

    Thanks for the feed back. I believe a few strategic changes can reduce frustration for members and contributors. I think prompting contributors to rebase (if needed) prior to creating a PR can further streamline this a little. Clearly #17420 should be merged first - I can always add language about rebasing after that.

    I also put in a feature request with Travis CI to warn about upstream failures on a topic branch. Maybe they will solve that part of the issue in the future upgrade?

  16. RandyMcMillan closed this on Nov 19, 2019

  17. fanquake removed the label Waiting for author on May 28, 2020
  18. DrahtBot locked this on Feb 15, 2022

github-metadata-mirror

This is a metadata mirror of the GitHub repository bitcoin/bitcoin. This site is not affiliated with GitHub. Content is generated from a GitHub metadata backup.
generated: 2026-04-17 06:14 UTC

This site is hosted by @0xB10C
More mirrored repositories can be found on mirror.b10c.me