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

AddingPowerSupport_&_CISupport #1662

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 20, 2020
Merged

AddingPowerSupport_&_CISupport #1662

merged 1 commit into from Nov 20, 2020

Conversation

santosh653
Copy link
Contributor

adding power support.
Adding power support ppc64le with Continues Integration/testing so that code remains architecture independent.

This is part of the Ubuntu distribution for ppc64le. This helps us simplify testing later when distributions are re-building and re-releasing. For more info tag @gerrith3.

The build is successful on both arch: amd64/ppc64le, please find the Travis Link below.
https://travis-ci.com/github/santosh653/echo

Please let me know if you need any further details? or if I am missing any?

Thank You !!

adding power support
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 2, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #1662 into master will decrease coverage by 1.50%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1662      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.28%   83.78%   -1.51%     
==========================================
  Files          28       28              
  Lines        2216     1906     -310     
==========================================
- Hits         1890     1597     -293     
+ Misses        212      195      -17     
  Partials      114      114              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
middleware/method_override.go 80.95% <0.00%> (-3.67%) ⬇️
context.go 86.38% <0.00%> (-3.34%) ⬇️
middleware/redirect.go 85.00% <0.00%> (-3.24%) ⬇️
middleware/proxy.go 63.21% <0.00%> (-3.12%) ⬇️
middleware/basic_auth.go 65.62% <0.00%> (-2.95%) ⬇️
echo.go 83.58% <0.00%> (-2.36%) ⬇️
middleware/util.go 88.88% <0.00%> (-1.74%) ⬇️
response.go 85.18% <0.00%> (-1.66%) ⬇️
middleware/cors.go 77.94% <0.00%> (-1.52%) ⬇️
middleware/key_auth.go 66.66% <0.00%> (-1.13%) ⬇️
... and 18 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 151ed6b...44b4054. Read the comment docs.

@santosh653
Copy link
Contributor Author

If ll the checks are successful, Can you please Approve?

@santosh653
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can you Please check & approve this PR? It's been open from some time.,

@santosh653
Copy link
Contributor Author

Herewith Checking if you have any further questions on this.,

Thank you!!

@santosh653
Copy link
Contributor Author

A gentle nudge, Checking if you have any questions on this PR!!

@lammel
Copy link
Contributor

lammel commented Nov 11, 2020

I guess nudge every day, won't help much to speed up the review. It's more likely achieving the opposite.

I'm not sure we gain much from running the CI on other plattforms, as we are only using Go without any C libs.
So do we need the extra architecture? How is it helping others?

@gerrith3
Copy link

@lammel yeah - good point - @santosh653 try to give people at least a week before any reminder, and maybe one after a month just to see if there is an active maintainer. @lammel one advantage of testing ppc64le on top of tree validates that all of the underlying components are present, that the go compiler doesn't have any corner cases that your code drives, and announces if anyone adds any non-independent code. The time should be free (with new Travis CI policy, you may have to ask for more credits but that is free and mostly easy).

@santosh653
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lammel,. checking if you have any further queries on this?

@lammel lammel merged commit 3912d62 into labstack:master Nov 20, 2020
@lammel
Copy link
Contributor

lammel commented Nov 20, 2020

Lets see if it works out.
We can revert anyway if issues arise.

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 this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants