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

[WIP] Systemd service status check #135

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@lslezak
Member

lslezak commented Dec 12, 2017

Description

The code will live in a separate branch

  • To not mix the normal builds (unit tests) with cron builds (systemd check)
  • To have an extra badge in the README to easily spot a failure [Note: I'll add the same badge into the master branch as well.]
  • To notify the specified persons when a failure happens (avoid spamming for the failures in master or in the other branches/PR)
  • Travis is configured to run the cron job builds once a week for the systemd_states_check branch

Do not merge to master, keep this separate branch!!

This is just to discuss the implementation, close the PR after approving and keep the branch. Additionally turn on the GitHub branch protection for it so it's not deleted accidentally.

lslezak added some commits Dec 11, 2017

@lslezak lslezak referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2017

Closed

Initial implementation #1

@jreidinger

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jreidinger

jreidinger Dec 12, 2017

Member

codewise it looks good, even I still think if we have it in build section of rpm, it will be catched in staging when systemd changes, so we can react even faster. but this is good enough for me.

Member

jreidinger commented Dec 12, 2017

codewise it looks good, even I still think if we have it in build section of rpm, it will be catched in staging when systemd changes, so we can react even faster. but this is good enough for me.

@lslezak

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lslezak

lslezak Dec 12, 2017

Member

As already discussed at yast/systemd-change-guard#1, that would need BuildRequires: systemd which I'm not sure if it is a good idea, I'd rather avoid that.

Thanks for the review!

Member

lslezak commented Dec 12, 2017

As already discussed at yast/systemd-change-guard#1, that would need BuildRequires: systemd which I'm not sure if it is a good idea, I'd rather avoid that.

Thanks for the review!

@lslezak lslezak closed this Dec 12, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment