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

Updates and enhancements for the testing Dockerfile. #4885

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 27, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@jmchilton
Member

jmchilton commented Oct 27, 2017

  • Target dev on Github instead of stable on bitbucket for base dependencies and migrations.
  • Update to Ubuntu 16.04 ahead of trying to merge in Selenium support (should be a bit slimmer without the TS requirements layer also).
  • Use fancy new Node compatible with yarn.
Updates and enhancements for the Docker testing Dockerfile.
- Target dev on Github instead of stable on bitbucket for base dependencies and migrations.
- Update to Ubuntu 16.04 ahead of trying to merge in Selenium support (should be a bit slimmer without the TS requirements layer also).
- Use fancy new Node compatible with yarn.

@galaxybot galaxybot added this to the 18.01 milestone Oct 27, 2017

@martenson martenson merged commit 9257e93 into galaxyproject:dev Oct 27, 2017

6 checks passed

api test Build finished. 306 tests run, 4 skipped, 0 failed.
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
framework test Build finished. 162 tests run, 0 skipped, 0 failed.
Details
integration test Build finished. 57 tests run, 0 skipped, 0 failed.
Details
lgtm analysis: JavaScript No alert changes
Details
toolshed test Build finished. 577 tests run, 0 skipped, 0 failed.
Details
@jmchilton

This comment has been minimized.

Member

jmchilton commented Oct 27, 2017

Thanks for the merge!

I have manually triggered a Dockerhub build for this here. I'll tag a new release and open a PR to rerun tests if that builds correctly. The update in #4879 was to an image I manually pushed to Dockerhub that had some of these changes but not all of them. I'd rather be targeting an image built by Dockerhub with and corresponding to a committed Dockerfile.

@martenson

This comment has been minimized.

Member

martenson commented Oct 27, 2017

@jmchilton sounds good

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment