Add Windows support for Travis CI

[mckunda]

DO NOT MERGE UNTIL SECURITY PROBLEMS ARE RESOLVED!

Fixes #734

This PR is an attempt to provide Windows builds as proposed at #734

Prerequisites:

• chocolatey
• llvm (Travis uses v9.0.0)
• make (install using choco install make)

Build:

refreshenv
cmake . -B build -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=clang -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER=clang++ -G "Unix Makefiles"
cmake --build build --target jsonnetfmt
cmake --build build --target jsonnet
cmake --build build --target run_tests

.travis.yml is modified so that archives with executables can be found at directory upload

Problems:

• -pedantic leads to compiler errors since MSVC libraries use language extensions
• -std=c++11 leads to compiler errors
• unable to run setup.py
• unable to run regression tests (CMake target run_tests, filetest_suite/run_tests.sh)
• Secrets ARE NOT obfuscated in Travis Windows builds (means this PR is unable to merge)

Any support is appreciated.

[Toilal]

https://github.com/mcovalt/jsonnetbin just works and seems damn simple. Please take a look at this repository and include the setup.py configuration inside the official project.

[johnbartholomew]

Hi! Thanks for your contribution, and your patience!

The Travis CI build unfortunately stopped working a while ago (I'm not sure exactly when), so this PR in its current form is no longer viable. However we now GitHub actions workflow to replace it, so hopefully we can set up something that will satisfy #734

https://github.com/mcovalt/jsonnetbin just works and seems damn simple. Please take a look at this repository and include the setup.py configuration inside the official project.

That repository is not accessible to me - perhaps the author has deleted it or made it private. I see they left a comment https://github.com/google/jsonnet/issues/734#issuecomment-634846921 that gives a hint at what they did though. I also see you (@Toilal) have a package derived from jsonnetbin at https://github.com/Toilal/python-jsonnet-binary

[mckunda]

Ok, closing as irrelevant.

[johnbartholomew]

@mckunda FYI, if you are still interested in Windows support for the Python module, I am hoping that #1137 will get us significantly closer to that.