[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2] Add GitLab's CI/CD configuration

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 05:38:44PM +0300, Arkadiusz Hiler wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 04:25:50PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 4:24 PM Arkadiusz Hiler
> > <arkadiusz.hiler at intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 04:18:56PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 4:15 PM Arkadiusz Hiler
> > > > <arkadiusz.hiler at intel.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 03:09:04PM +0300, Arkadiusz Hiler wrote:
> > > > > > The CI/CD pipeline is configured the following way:
> > > > > >  1. Build docker images and add them to repo's registry (manual step for
> > > > > >     now, automation needs GitLab to be updated).
> > > > > >  2. Build igt with meson on Debian and Fedora.
> > > > > >  3. Run `ninja tests` on Fedora.
> > > > > >  4. Build and publish docs as an artifact, for GitLab Pages.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > v2: Typos and fully-featured meson build.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cc: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala at intel.com>
> > > > > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arkadiusz Hiler <arkadiusz.hiler at intel.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Both images are already in our registry.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here you can see the pipline running (on a testing branch):
> > > > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools/pipelines/6292
> > > >
> > > > I think the "proper" gitlab way of doing this is not through a
> > > > temporary branch, but through a merge request. Or a personal fork.
> > > > Gives you the exact same amount of gitlab-ci testing as a branch. Just
> > > > an aside, figure we'll start with the process bikeshedding right away
> > > > :-)
> > > > -Daniel
> > >
> > > I was playing with that on my fork, but the issue was that I would have
> > > to change the paths to registry each time I send a patch and push it to
> > > my repo. Too annoying, so I went with a temporary branch.
> > 
> > If you do an MR, does it work better?
> > -Daniel
> 
> They are disabled for IGT, which kind of makes sense, as we do not take
> contributions that way (yet?) - there's no proper CI for MRs.

Huh, I guess that was Daniel Stone's doing. I think there's some sense in
having issues disabled, but imo merge requests we can leave enabled. Much,
much easier for test-driving gitlab process issues this way.

Ofc anyone who submits as MR only will get redirect to the m-l.

Ack if we just enable them again?
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch