express
express copied to clipboard
expressjs
GitHub Actions workflow for Linux and Windows machines
Edit: added @tspascoal as a co-author on this.
@tspascoal and I have created a GitHub Actions workflow that will build express on both Linux and Windows machines. I have not opened an issue to link to this, in order to allow all discussion to happen on the PR. I'm happy to open an issue if someone would like me to.
Average build time for Travis (Linux) and AppVeyor(Windows) pipelines currently in use is around 30 minutes. With this workflow, I was able to build both Linux and Windows in just over 5 minutes, total. This is in part due to the number of concurrent pipelines that GitHub gives to open source projects.
If you look at the file, you'll notice I am using the same steps for both the Linux builds and the Windows builds. This allows for code reuse, and also makes it where, if you need to modify a step, you only have to modify it in one place.
I'm making use of a matrix strategy as well. Right now, the workflow is set to only use Linux and Windows. If we wanted to also build on Mac (which is an option), all we would need to do is add macos-latest to the matrix. The same with any other specific versions of Node we would want to test against.
Here is an example of the build output.
Here is an example of a specific job (Node 2.5 running on Linux)
You can click into the jobs and then into each individual step on a job and see details of the run.
At this point, this workflow does everything the current Travis and Appveyor workflows do. In addition, it goes a step beyond the AppVeyor workflow, because the GH Action workflow supports pulling down the nightly build for the Windows build (similar to what the Travis build does), which the current Appveyor workflow does not do.
At this point I've made all the initially requested changes from the comments earlier in the pull request.
So I have a "process" question. For all the conversations above in this PR, should I mark them as resolved, or should someone else? I think I've answered all the questions asked, but didn't know the appropriate protocol. @wesleytodd @dougwilson could you provide me some guidance?
Hi @mickeygousset I didn't even know you had the ability to mark them as resolved 😄 . Yes, please do so! Wes and myself spoke about this issue last night and I mentioned resolving the conversations to clear it up, but if you want to do so, please go ahead. Wes gave his blessing there at the end, so I believe this is ready to land at this point. I'm targeting it into the 4.18 branch to get in the line prior to release, which will be a huge improvement to testing times!
One thing I started looking at (but never really finished) is what we need to change on our badges to get them to show the status of these GitHub Actions now vs the Travis CI + AppVeyor statues. Not sure if you have that knowledge, and I'm still going to look into it, but just wanted to mention it here in case you knew ❤️
I don't know if I have the ability, but it gives me a Resolve button, so I will try. :)
Yes, there are status badges. I'll figure it out and report back.
GitHub Action Status Badge: https://help.github.com/en/actions/configuring-and-managing-workflows/configuring-a-workflow#adding-a-workflow-status-badge-to-your-repository
I think @dougwilson may still have to do something to clear up the blocking.
Nice on the badge! I'm looking at our badge provider (badgen.net) and I think the way we would do it would be to use the https://badgen.net/github#github-status-owner-repo-ref-context area, where the name of the status check that the workflow leaves would be what we would key off.
Ok, so looking at https://github.com/badgen/badgen.net/issues/304 it seems that we could use https://badgen.net/github#github-checks-owner-repo-ref for the exact replica of that github workflow badge link through badgen.