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

Switch to Github Workflows for CI? #189

Closed
Ericson2314 opened this issue Mar 19, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #196
Closed

Switch to Github Workflows for CI? #189

Ericson2314 opened this issue Mar 19, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #196

Comments

@Ericson2314
Copy link
Collaborator

I hate to pull all our eggs in on one basket called GitHub, but Travis has been rather slow, and it would be nice to share more stuff between Unix and Windows CI.

Maybe the first step is to have all 3 and see how they perform in practice?

I do not have enough repo permissions, however, to try this myself.

andreasabel added a commit to andreasabel/happy that referenced this issue Jul 14, 2021
Get CI on GitHub Actions via a patched workflow generated by haskell-ci.

- DEVELOPER.md explains how to regenerate the CI, e.g. in case of new GHCs.

- .github/haskell-ci.patch modifies the generated workflow by:
  * Setting flag 'bootstrap' to False in calls to cabal.
  * Installing happy instead of just building it.
  * Setting HAPPY and HC for running the tests.

- tests/Makefile has been modified to not overwrite already set HAPPY
  and HC variables.  This is needed to locate these executables correctly.

- cabal.haskell-ci contains configuration for running haskell-ci:
  It removes constraints on packages containers, mtl and transformers.
  Otherwise, these will be constrained to the GHC-shipped versions,
  which isn't compatible with happy for all GHC versions.

The logic behind this CI setup is identical to

  haskell/alex#189

[fixes haskell#189] [fixes haskell#193]
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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant