Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 19, 2021. It is now read-only.

bot-ci task overview #12

Closed
22 of 26 tasks
fwalch opened this issue Aug 19, 2014 · 12 comments
Closed
22 of 26 tasks

bot-ci task overview #12

fwalch opened this issue Aug 19, 2014 · 12 comments

Comments

@fwalch
Copy link
Member

fwalch commented Aug 19, 2014

This is a list of ideas for bot-ci improvements/changes.

Open (highest-priority first)

On Hold

Done

@fwalch fwalch changed the title [RFC] Build documentation in parallel [WIP] bot-ci refactorings Aug 20, 2014
@fwalch fwalch changed the title [WIP] bot-ci refactorings bot-ci task overview Sep 9, 2014
@justinmk
Copy link
Member

Dunno if we'll need it, but just saw this on HN https://github.com/EricChiang/pup

I found jq great for JSON, would be great to have a similar tool for HTML.

@fwalch
Copy link
Member Author

fwalch commented Sep 13, 2014

@justinmk That looks interesting, thanks! I don't have too much faith in the robustness of the current extract_* methods, so this could certainly improve things.

@justinmk
Copy link
Member

Things we need on top of #28:

  • check pull requests closed in the last N days and remove RFC/WIP/RDY tags
    • sample request: send_gh_api_request "repos/neovim/neovim/issues?state=closed&since=2014-11-13T00:00:00EST" (note that the since parameter is not available in the pulls/ handler, so we'll get a few issues in the response, but it's harmless)
  • .... can't remember the other thing

@justinmk
Copy link
Member

check pull requests closed in the last N days and remove RFC/WIP/RDY tags

Actually, looks like waffle automatically removed RDY with I closed a PR. So we probably don't need to add this to the script.

@justinmk
Copy link
Member

Added a todo about switching to the python script instead of the awk script for HTML help. See also neovim/neovim.github.io#55 (comment)

@0x647262
Copy link
Contributor

0x647262 commented Jul 7, 2017

Investigate using travis-setup.sh with source instead of eval.

I assume this refers to: https://github.com/neovim/bot-ci/blob/master/scripts/travis-setup.sh#L26

On my machine:

 » /bin/luarocks path
export LUA_PATH='/home/krak-n/.luarocks/share/lua/5.3/?.lua;/home/krak-n/.luarocks/share/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;/usr/share/lua/5.3/?.lua;/usr/share/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?.lua;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;./?.lua;./?/init.lua'
export LUA_CPATH='/home/krak-n/.luarocks/lib/lua/5.3/?.so;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?.so;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/loadall.so;./?.so'

If I am not mistaken that line can be shortened to (removing the eval):

"$(${NVIM_DEPS_PREFIX}/bin/luarocks path)"

Example on a local machine:

 » $(/bin/luarocks path)
 » echo $LUA_CPATH 
'/home/krak-n/.luarocks/lib/lua/5.3/?.so;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?.so;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/loadall.so;./?.so'
 » echo $LUA_PATH 
'/home/krak-n/.luarocks/share/lua/5.3/?.lua;/home/krak-n/.luarocks/share/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;/usr/share/lua/5.3/?.lua;/usr/share/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?.lua;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;./?.lua;./?/init.lua'
 » 

I'll open a PR shortly.

EDIT: https://github.com/neovim/bot-ci/blob/master/ci/common/common.sh#L10 might be worth looking over as well...

@justinmk
Copy link
Member

justinmk commented Jul 8, 2017

@Krakn Help on bot-ci is really appreciated!

Investigate using travis-setup.sh with source instead of eval.

It's referring to the before_install line at https://github.com/neovim/bot-ci#generated-builds

However the change you made is probably ok.

@0x647262
Copy link
Contributor

0x647262 commented Jul 8, 2017

@justinmk It was reviewed and the changes I made broke things. :(

If I am not mistaken, at the end of the travis-setup.sh file, we could change the call to _call_function :

_call_function "${1}"

Which would allow you to:

curl -Ss "${URL}" | bash -s -- 'nightly-x64'

or

bash <(curl -Ss "${URL}") 'nightly-x64'

Though I am not entirely sure what benefits are gained by moving from eval to piping to bash...

@ZyX-I Thoughts?

EDIT: Missed a closing )

@ZyX-I
Copy link
Contributor

ZyX-I commented Jul 8, 2017

If I am not mistaken that line can be shortened to (removing the eval):

"$(${NVIM_DEPS_PREFIX}/bin/luarocks path)"
Example on a local machine:

 » $(/bin/luarocks path)
 » echo $LUA_CPATH 
'/home/krak-n/.luarocks/lib/lua/5.3/?.so;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?.so;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/loadall.so;./?.so'
 » echo $LUA_PATH 
'/home/krak-n/.luarocks/share/lua/5.3/?.lua;/home/krak-n/.luarocks/share/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;/usr/share/lua/5.3/?.lua;/usr/share/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?.lua;/usr/lib/lua/5.3/?/init.lua;./?.lua;./?/init.lua'
 » 

I'll open a PR shortly.

I see why you thought PR might work, but $(foo) and "$(foo)" are different things: the first from “on the local machine” does somewhat work because it does do argument splititng, but this has its own problems:

  1. Right in your example you see that echo $LUA_PATH returns '…'. This is not OK, this indicates that ' were prepended to the first and appended to the last paths, proper variables must not have the quotes as they are part of the shell syntax and not variable values and echo does not do quoting.
  2. This still is not going to work with paths with spaces.

The second as I said in that PR tries to execute the entire string as a single command name. Be careful with such tests.


As for last question: the first variant is going to work, the second variant is using bashism and I am not sure whether travis uses bash and not dash to execute scripts. And it is missing closing parenthesis.

@ZyX-I
Copy link
Contributor

ZyX-I commented Jul 8, 2017

Benefits of piped version are rather minor: a bit faster and a bit less memory consuming due to bash being able to start parsing (and, not sure, but AFAIR executing as well) script before it is fully downloaded, but you would not normally notice that and it will be even less noticeable should the whole script arrive in one packet.

@0x647262
Copy link
Contributor

0x647262 commented Jul 9, 2017

Investigate using travis-setup.sh with source instead of eval.

In regards specifially to source, I found the following article: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/34842

Building off of ZyX-I's last comment: I would say it is safe to leave that eval alone, as there seems to be little benefit moving to a piped version.

@fwalch If no one else has an issue with it, I think we can check that task off of the list.

@justinmk
Copy link
Member

I've created separate issues for the remaining items here.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants