[CI] Remove codebuild configuration. #5536
Conversation
NlightNFotis
requested review from
chrisr-diffblue,
kroening,
peterschrammel,
smowton and
tautschnig
as code owners
|
That said -- why is codebuild being run on this PR? |
|
@martin-cs It's not being run - it's being triggered because it's hooked into the repository's settings, but because of the config being removed, it's hanged. I have asked @peterschrammel to review it, and if he thinks it's good, to review the required status from these checks, so they are no longer there. This isn't new - same thing happened when we removed travis :) |
|
The codebuild jobs include a Linux + clang compiler build, which as far as I can see hasn't been ported to git hub actions yet. I think there may be value in porting this over, before we abolish code build. A Linux + clang compiler job may be useful for isolating whether build failures on mac are due to using the Clang compiler or due to the standard library versions they use. In addition, the error messages from Clang can sometimes be easier to read than the ones from gcc. |
|
Okay, #5559 was now created to introduce the missing build to github actions, so we now all previous codebuild jobs should be ported to github actions. |
Since we have now implemented most jobs on github actions, it makes sense to depend on that and remove codebuild, as this has multiple benefits: 1) It makes it easier for project contributors to see the result of the builds of their PRs (in codebuild, it was very complicated to access the build results, and as a matter of fact we had special instructions for accessing them). 2) It removes the maintenance burden from us to maintain multiple CI systems, especially since there are not obvious benefits to doing so. 3) We no longer need to have so many jobs needed for one PR, which used to create multiple problems, as it was the case that some jobs would always fail in some way (like fail to be initialised).
NlightNFotis
force-pushed
the
remove_codebuild
branch
from
fe7b735 to
2d3a5b7
Compare
NlightNFotis
requested a review
from hannes-steffenhagen-diffblue
as a code owner
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #5536 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 72.84% 72.86% +0.01%
===========================================
Files 1421 1421
Lines 154138 154171 +33
===========================================
+ Hits 112289 112331 +42
+ Misses 41849 41840 -9
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
@tautschnig Hi Michael, can you take another look at this? We have ported almost all of the jobs to GitHub Actions now (the ones missing are ones based on outdated configuration, like clang-3.8, and some windows setups like building under Does this look more fit for purpose now? |
NlightNFotis
changed the title
Since we have now implemented most jobs on github
actions, it makes sense to depend on that and remove
codebuild, as this has multiple benefits:
see the result of the builds of their PRs (in
codebuild, it was very complicated to access
the build results, and as a matter of fact we
had special instructions for accessing them).
multiple CI systems, especially since there are not
obvious benefits to doing so.
PR, which used to create multiple problems, as it was
the case that some jobs would always fail in some way
(like fail to be initialised).