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

Why is there a travis.cfg in the root dir but a jenkins.cfg in buildout.d Should this not be in the same place? #3

Closed
do3cc opened this issue Dec 5, 2014 · 7 comments

Comments

@do3cc
Copy link
Member

do3cc commented Dec 5, 2014

No description provided.

@pbauer
Copy link
Sponsor Member

pbauer commented Dec 6, 2014

@do3cc true, you're welcome to clean that up.

@tisto
Copy link
Sponsor Member

tisto commented Feb 5, 2015

I don't think we should ship with jenkins.cfg at all. Travis should be the recommended way for add-on products.

@pbauer
Copy link
Sponsor Member

pbauer commented Feb 5, 2015

We test some client-specific addons on jenkins. For this a jenkins.cfg is usefull. I think we should keep it and maybe add a question to the setup "Prepare Jenkins Integration? [False]"

@do3cc
Copy link
Member Author

do3cc commented Feb 5, 2015

There is a jenkins plugin to read .travis.yml file. I can investigate into how to use that and add documentation for it. the jenkins.cfg can die.

@cedricmessiant
Copy link
Contributor

It could be great to have questions in the setup for both jenkins and Travis (Travis should be True by default).

@iham
Copy link
Member

iham commented Apr 7, 2016

+1 on asking for preparation of ci-integration.

i like the idea of asking for support of one or even both (jenkins[false], travis[true])

personally i might end up using gitlabs ci so i dont want to use any of them. so this way its a simple input and not a search for files and configs to delete.

@gforcada
Copy link
Sponsor Member

There is no buildout.d anymore, so closing.

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

No branches or pull requests

6 participants