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

Meta: migrate from travis-ci to Github Actions #2260

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 25, 2021
Merged

Conversation

ljharb
Copy link
Member

@ljharb ljharb commented Dec 28, 2020

(ref ljharb/object.assign#81)

travis-ci's new pricing plan has effectively dropped support for open source repos, so we need to migrate off of it.

(To work properly, these workflows must be set to pull_request_target, not pull_request, and must have a GOOGLE_API_KEY secret available, as well as GH_TOKEN - still working on this)

@ljharb ljharb added the meta label Dec 28, 2020
@ljharb ljharb force-pushed the travis branch 5 times, most recently from 24e6a1a to d5dc0cc Compare December 28, 2020 20:39
@leobalter
Copy link
Member

to make this work properly, you eventually need to manually disable the old expected checks from TravisCI or they will remain eternally waiting for status.

Disregard if you already know this, it's just trauma from an event in the past.

@ljharb
Copy link
Member Author

ljharb commented Jan 5, 2021

Yes, as soon as this PR is ready to land, I'll make the actions checks "required" and the travis checks no longer required, but as soon as I do that, every PR will be unmergeable until they're rebased, so it's the last step before/during merge.

.github/workflows/build.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/deploy.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/preview.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
alrra added a commit to alrra/travis-scripts that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2021
Deprecate project as:

 * Travis CI's new pricing plan¹ has effectively dropped support
   for open source, so people are migrating² away from Travis CI
   (I did the same quite some time ago).

 * This project hasn't been maintain in years, nor are there any
   plans to do so in the future.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¹ https://blog.travis-ci.com/2020-11-02-travis-ci-new-billing
² ljharb/object.assign#81
  tc39/ecma262#2260

Close: #30
Close: #31
Close: #32
Close: #33
Close: #34
alrra added a commit to alrra/travis-scripts that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2021
Deprecate project as:

 * Travis CI's new pricing plan¹ has effectively dropped support
   for open source, so people are migrating² away from Travis CI
   (I did the same quite some time ago).

 * This project hasn't been maintain in years, nor are there any
   plans to do so in the future.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¹ https://blog.travis-ci.com/2020-11-02-travis-ci-new-billing
² ljharb/object.assign#81
  tc39/ecma262#2260

Close: #30
Close: #31
Close: #32
Close: #33
Close: #34
@ljharb ljharb force-pushed the travis branch 2 times, most recently from 6076872 to ed611b0 Compare June 16, 2021 21:52
.github/workflows/build.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@ljharb ljharb force-pushed the travis branch 14 times, most recently from 3074cf6 to d644d01 Compare June 19, 2021 05:03
@ljharb ljharb changed the title [meta] migrate from travis-ci to Github Actions Meta: migrate from travis-ci to Github Actions Jun 23, 2021
@ljharb ljharb marked this pull request as ready for review June 23, 2021 23:27
@ljharb ljharb requested review from syg, michaelficarra, bakkot and a team June 23, 2021 23:27
ljharb added a commit to ljharb/ecma262 that referenced this pull request Jun 24, 2021
@ljharb ljharb requested a review from bakkot June 24, 2021 04:54
Copy link
Contributor

@bakkot bakkot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hard to review this for correctness, since it interacts with a bunch of other systems, so take my approval as "this looks reasonable as far as I can tell, let's land it and see what happens".

ljharb added a commit to ljharb/ecma262 that referenced this pull request Jun 24, 2021
@michaelficarra michaelficarra added the ready to merge Editors believe this PR needs no further reviews, and is ready to land. label Jun 24, 2021
@ljharb ljharb merged commit b4e31f6 into tc39:master Jun 25, 2021
ljharb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 25, 2021
This is pushed directly to the default branch, because workflow_run scripts are ran from the default branch
@ljharb ljharb deleted the travis branch June 25, 2021 20:22
ljharb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 25, 2021
This is pushed directly to the default branch, because workflow_run scripts are ran from the default branch
ljharb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2021
ljharb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2021
ljharb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2021
ljharb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2021
ljharb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2021
mathiasbynens pushed a commit to mathiasbynens/ecma262 that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2021
mathiasbynens pushed a commit to mathiasbynens/ecma262 that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2021
This is pushed directly to the default branch, because workflow_run scripts are ran from the default branch
mathiasbynens pushed a commit to mathiasbynens/ecma262 that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
meta ready to merge Editors believe this PR needs no further reviews, and is ready to land.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants