Re: [boost] About authorizing CircleCI

Subject: Re: [boost] About authorizing CircleCI
From: James E. King, III (jking_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-03-07 20:06:24

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:41 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Le 06/03/2018 à 22:05, Adam Wulkiewicz via Boost a écrit :
>
>> Vicente J. Botet Escriba Via Boost wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, recently I heard of CircleCI (https://circleci.com/) and it seems
>>> much faster than Travis.
>>>
>>>
>>> Is someone using it? What is your feedback?
>>>
>>> If the feedback is positive, could someone authorize CircleCI to access
>>> boostorg?
>>>
>>
>> We're using it at Boost.Geometry since Jun 2015. The reason is we have
>> many quite extensive tests which fail at Travis due to time and memory
>> constraints.
>>
> Adam, what I must do for Boost.Thread?
> I've already this PR https://github.com/boostorg/thread/pull/213.
>
> Vicente
>
>
Boost.DateTime, Boost.Format, Boost.Uuid, and (hopefully soon)
Boost.ProgramOptions use Travis CI, Appveyor, codecov.io, and Coverity Scan.

Here's a pull request with these bits added and instructions; you could use
something similar to bootstrap thread:
https://github.com/boostorg/program_options/pull/47

The only complaint is that since we all have different repositories, I now
have multiple copies of my generic "ci/" script directory floating around.

Here's a good example of this integration at work:
https://github.com/boostorg/format/pull/53

Repositories with builds that take less than 50 minutes per build job can
use Travis CI.
If your build is longer, like Boost.Spirit is, then you may need another
solution like CircleCI.

In any case whatever you choose, it's good to see the project as a whole
moving towards more modern delivery processes and submitter self-service.

- Jim