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

(maint) Prepare for travis to deploy the module to the forge #43

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 10, 2019
Merged

(maint) Prepare for travis to deploy the module to the forge #43

merged 4 commits into from
May 10, 2019

Conversation

jarretlavallee
Copy link
Contributor

@jarretlavallee jarretlavallee commented May 2, 2019

This PR is aimed at configuring travis to be able to deploy this module to the forge when a new /^v\d/` tag has been added.

Prior to this commit, the .sync.yml was missing the `/html/` line for
the gitignore, so it was being removed on a `pdk update`. This commit
adds that path to the `.sync.yml`.
Prior to this commit, we moved the acceptance tests into the
.travis.yml and unmanged the .travis.yml. This commit moves the
configuration into the .sync.yml and adds the basis for configuring
deployments to the forge with travis. The secret in travis will need to
be created for deployment to work.
@jarretlavallee
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MartyEwings I moved the litmus config into the .sync.yml to add some capabilities around the deploy feature from travis. We should be able to use travis to deploy the module to the forge. The next steps are:

  1. Add the deploy password to travis: https://github.com/puppetlabs/pdk-templates#travisyml
  2. Add that encrypted string to the .sync.yml in the .travis.yml => secure value.
  3. Deploy a new version of the module by adding a v## tag to the master branch.

What do you think about this approach?

@MartyEwings
Copy link
Collaborator

@jarretlavallee great! Between this and the testing we cut a bunch of manual intervention from the process, the easier to deploy, the more chance we will contribute.

One thing I noticed was since I added the complex containers with systemd enabled, travis takes loads of time to complete checks, what are your thoughts on that? I don't think it'll go up more with more tests, seems to be the container provisioning taking the time

@MartyEwings
Copy link
Collaborator

MartyEwings commented May 2, 2019

@jarretlavallee Also the repo is public now, is that an issue for the secrets? Or are they obfuscated in someways.. update! Seeing the encrypted secret in the travis cli... looks ok then !

@jarretlavallee
Copy link
Contributor Author

It looks like only the EL images are taking longer. We are seeing those two jobs take 20+ minutes. It is hanging on booting those containers for about 7.5 minutes (about 2 minutes per container). We then hit the same 8ish minutes for the acceptance testing of these containers. It does not happen with the debian containers with systemd.

I don't think it will go up further, but maybe we should scale back what we test on for the EL systems. Perhaps getting rid of oracle and scientific? That would reduce it a good amount.

Prior to this commmit, EL testing included Centos, Oracle, and
Scientificlinux. This commit removed scientificlinux to reduce the
overall time of testing in travis.
@jarretlavallee
Copy link
Contributor Author

jarretlavallee commented May 3, 2019

Removing ScientificLinux cut it down from 20 minutes to 15 minutes. In theory, removing Oracle will bring it down to 10 minutes, but we should probably fix the docker images to increase the speed and leave those OS in the testing.

The dockerfiles are in https://github.com/puppetlabs/litmus_image so I will take a look in a follow up PR.

Prior to this commit, the credentials were not valid. This commit adds
the credentials to the travis.yml through a travis secure string.
@jarretlavallee jarretlavallee changed the title (WIP) (maint) Prepare for travis to deploy the module to the forge (maint) Prepare for travis to deploy the module to the forge May 9, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@kamiolszewski kamiolszewski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this was reviewed by Erik Hansen and Charlie Sharpsteen before submitting to Support Tasks. It has cleared testing. Ok to post.

@kamiolszewski kamiolszewski merged commit 2038af3 into puppetlabs:master May 10, 2019
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.

3 participants