Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Setup GithubActions Build & Test Process #10

Closed
Nat1405 opened this issue Feb 16, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Setup GithubActions Build & Test Process #10

Nat1405 opened this issue Feb 16, 2021 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@Nat1405
Copy link
Owner

Nat1405 commented Feb 16, 2021

Adrian recommended switching from TravisCI to GitHub Actions for my CI process. Since it seems like a great learning opportunity, I'll try it. The requirements of this build process are:

  • Use the same build instructions as in ijiraq/gemini_processing/niri/dockerfiles/*. This acts as a consistent environment for running data reduction code.
  • Install the latest push of code to the dev branch into the up-to-date docker container.
  • Should be a short amount of time to build and start running pytests. Makes use of caching if necessary. "Quickly" here should be less than 10 minutes; preferably three minutes.
  • Install required test data quickly and efficiently.

This is a new requirement for PR #6 .

@Nat1405
Copy link
Owner Author

Nat1405 commented Feb 16, 2021

I think the best way to do tests will be to pull/get the Docker container (it will happen to have niriPipe:dev installed on it), make this repo available in it and then run pytests on it, both via GitHub Actions. This is because we want to test code on each push, but the docker container needs to install code from a single particular branch within itself so it will be usable by batch and arcade.

Nat1405 added a commit to ijiraq/gemini_processing that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
This fixes #34, and is one of the prerequisites for Nat1405/niriPipe#10.
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 18, 2021
Relevant to #10. Timed to take 9m44s for a cache miss, 7m43s for a cache
hit. Hmmm...
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 18, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 18, 2021
Also relevant to #10. This approach was timed to take 1m19s.
Theoretically, it has a limit of 200 pulls per 6 hours as long as
authentication is working correctly. Open a new issue if you start
bumping against these limits. Also, downside to this approach is that
you have to trigger a new build everytime dev changes.... Buuut it might
be possible to set up a GitHub Action to do that build and push for you!
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 18, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 18, 2021
Nat1405 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 18, 2021
@Nat1405
Copy link
Owner Author

Nat1405 commented Mar 3, 2021

All done (for now)! Closed in #6 .

@Nat1405 Nat1405 closed this as completed Mar 3, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant