Update Actions #432

MSP-Greg · 2020-02-12T05:17:29Z

Remove rvm where possible, add ruby-head, misc
Add mingw & mswin Windows testing

In the past, many Ruby 'master/head' builds were not fully tested. All the builds used are built on GitHub and fully tested.

hsbt · 2020-02-12T05:20:35Z

.github/workflows/windows.yml

-      run: rake
+      - uses: actions/checkout@v2
+      - name: Set up Ruby
+        uses: MSP-Greg/actions-ruby@v1


Why don't you use ruby/setup-ruby?

Can't update MSYS2, etc.

No mswin build

Both mswin & mingw builds are fully tested. Last time I checked, the MinGW build that ruby/setup-ruby uses doesn't run test-all.

Re 1., how about a setup-msys2 or so action doing just that (and nothing on other OS)? Maybe https://github.com/MSP-Greg/msys2-action already does that?
Re 2., fair point, I wouldn't be against adding the possibility to use a mswin build in ruby/setup-ruby. Can you open an issue at https://github.com/ruby/setup-ruby if you think it's important to test on mswin? I know little about Windows, but I thought most people use RubyInstaller (and I'd think extremely few do their own builds).
Re 3., doesn't the RubyInstaller-head build run test-all? If not, can you open an issue for that on https://github.com/oneclick/rubyinstaller2?

I see you used ruby/setup-ruby for non-Windows workflows, so I think this change is fine, since anyway there are Windows-specific steps in there. But it would be good to make it available for cases which can share a workflow for all 3 OS.

I'm trying to deprecate msys2-action and replace it with actions-ruby, which I could rename setup-ruby.

mswin build - ruby/ruby tests against it. So, as recently happened with ruby/openssl, mingw passed there, but when they pushed the changes to ruby/ruby, mswin failed. By having a mswin build available for CI, that doesn't need to happen.

At present, mswin builds are not often used. But, I know of one company using an embedded Ruby based on RI2, and they're having issues with the fact that their app builds with VS 2019 and the RI2 builds use a different msvc runtime (the one used by MSYS2 tools). So, there is reason to build/test against mswin/msvc.

doesn't the RubyInstaller-head build run test-all?

See below. I'm not sure about spec tests, they may run when it hits RI2, not sure.

https://github.com/oneclick/rubyinstaller2-packages/blob/63699f6b8155435cbb499f60de6e534c107fe9bd/mingw-w64-ruby-head/PKGBUILD#L65-L71

Simply put, my shit works, or, if it occasionally doesn't, it gets fixed quickly. ruby-loco has been used in CI for almost three years in a lot of repos. The one time I recall it breaking was over the RubyGems binstub issue, and I added tests for that. I also actively encourage repos to test with ruby master on all platforms, which benefits ruby/ruby...

EDIT: FWIW, I use ruby-loco mingw every time I update https://msp-greg.github.io/, and any work I do on PR's I start with ruby-loco. I 'walk what I talk'...

I've given a few more thoughts about this.
I think your 3 points are all valid points to use your action here.

is part of package management, I wouldn't want to have that in setup-ruby (Integrate system operations into setup-ruby setup-ruby#21)

For that to work, one needs a separate windows workflow/job, because mswin, mingw as Ruby versions just wouldn't make sense on Ubuntu & macOS. If it's a separate workflow/job then it's also easy to simply switch to your action in the windows workflow/job.

We should resolve that in RubyInstaller, good catch.

I think it's good to use your action for fine control like testing on both mingw & mswin.

I'm trying to deprecate msys2-action and replace it with actions-ruby, which I could rename setup-ruby.

I think something with windows, mswin or mingw in the action name would be helpful to clarify it's meant for Ruby on Windows. Another setup-ruby would be confusing because it wouldn't be a superset of ruby/setup-ruby.

Re the name, how about 'setup-ruby-win'? I think that would be clear to most people.

Re RubyInstaller vs ruby-loco mingw, I've set up ruby-loco to test against a master branch. All test suites are run against install, they're isolated (so all run), and logic is there to determine if any fail. The mswin build is currently building in a more traditional way (like ruby/ruby CI), but I'm converting it over to match the mingw build. A lot of repos have been using it for quite a while, including RubyGems.

Off topic, but stepping back, should the Ruby organization support Ruby Windows binaries itself? Should the 'devkit' be a repo under ruby? Should ruby/ruby support dll manifests in Windows binaries? Etc, etc...

setup-ruby-win sounds good to me.

I'd be OK to add mingw/mswin builds built by ruby-loco in ruby/setup-ruby, if it doesn't add much complexity to the action, PR welcome.

I filed oneclick/rubyinstaller2#169

hsbt · 2020-02-12T05:20:53Z

.github/workflows/macos.yml

+    strategy:
+      fail-fast: false
+      matrix:
+        ruby: [ 2.7, 2.4 ]


Can you add 2.6 and 2.5 to this.

I can if you'd like. Previously, just one job was ran, and it was the default Actions Ruby.

MacOS jobs have a much lower concurrent limit that Ubuntu or Windows jobs, so I thought I'd run low/high...

.github/workflows/ubuntu-jruby.yml

eregon

This looks good to me.

eregon · 2020-02-16T16:22:49Z

.github/workflows/ubuntu.yml

+      - name: Install dependencies
+        run: bundle install
+      - name: Run test
+        run: rake


The indentation changes here make it harder to read the diff, could you keep the original indentation?

I could, but it was my impression that proper yaml should have array members indented...

Yeah, I'm not sure if there is a recommendation on that, I think both styles were used in .travis.yml back then.
I personally prefer the lesser indented variant, so it's only 4-spaces indented for steps (6 starts to feel quite deep already).

Re indenting, not an issue I feel strongly about. But, since I changed the indents in .github/workflows/ubuntu-jruby.yml, knowing the preference affects what I do with the merge conflict.

My tired old eyes prefer the indented style...

eregon · 2020-02-16T17:20:20Z

@hsbt Could you merge this if you agree?
@MSP-Greg There is a conflict in ubuntu-jruby.yml

1. Remove rvm where possible, add ruby-head, misc 2. Add mingw & mswin Windows testing

MSP-Greg · 2020-02-16T18:09:44Z

Apologize for not mentioning it previously, but Appveyor is testing on the below. The 24-x64 & 25-x64 jobs are identical to jobs done on Actions. The two 32 bit jobs (24 & 25) cannot be done on Actions, as both the Ruby binaries and the gcc tools are unavailable. I can remove in this PR...

I prefer to remove jobs in AppVeyor & Travis that are run on Actions, as they often backup CI across the whole Ruby account.

  matrix:
    - ruby_version: "24"
    - ruby_version: "24-x64"
    - ruby_version: "25"
    - ruby_version: "25-x64"

eregon · 2020-02-16T23:12:53Z

I think it's all right to remove redundant jobs in AppVeyor at least.

MSP-Greg · 2020-02-17T00:07:28Z

I think it's all right to remove redundant jobs in AppVeyor at least.

Removed with additional commit.

eregon · 2020-02-17T14:02:15Z

I'll merge this, I think @hsbt concerns have been addressed.

hsbt requested changes Feb 12, 2020

View reviewed changes

MSP-Greg force-pushed the actions-update branch from ccaeaea to 61c8dbc Compare February 12, 2020 05:39

MSP-Greg mentioned this pull request Feb 12, 2020

jruby-head MSP-Greg/setup-ruby#1

Closed

deivid-rodriguez mentioned this pull request Feb 14, 2020

Use ruby/setup-ruby to try fix CI #434

Merged

MSP-Greg force-pushed the actions-update branch from 61c8dbc to ecb26c5 Compare February 16, 2020 04:45

eregon reviewed Feb 16, 2020

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/ubuntu-jruby.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

eregon approved these changes Feb 16, 2020

View reviewed changes

eregon reviewed Feb 16, 2020

View reviewed changes

Update Actions

47b3454

1. Remove rvm where possible, add ruby-head, misc 2. Add mingw & mswin Windows testing

MSP-Greg force-pushed the actions-update branch from ecb26c5 to 47b3454 Compare February 16, 2020 17:59

appveyor.yml - remove 64 bit Rubies, they are now tested in Actions

fcafe24

eregon merged commit bb8a35e into ruby:master Feb 17, 2020

MSP-Greg deleted the actions-update branch February 17, 2020 15:09

This was referenced Feb 22, 2020

Windows - ruby-head, ruby-mswin ruby/setup-ruby#22

Closed

What tests are run on ruby-head builds? oneclick/rubyinstaller2#169

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Update Actions #432

Update Actions #432

MSP-Greg commented Feb 12, 2020

hsbt Feb 12, 2020

MSP-Greg Feb 12, 2020 •

edited

Loading

eregon Feb 13, 2020

MSP-Greg Feb 13, 2020 •

edited

Loading

eregon Feb 16, 2020

MSP-Greg Feb 16, 2020

eregon Feb 16, 2020

eregon Feb 22, 2020

hsbt Feb 12, 2020

MSP-Greg Feb 12, 2020

MSP-Greg Feb 12, 2020

eregon left a comment

eregon Feb 16, 2020

MSP-Greg Feb 16, 2020

eregon Feb 16, 2020

MSP-Greg Feb 16, 2020

eregon commented Feb 16, 2020

MSP-Greg commented Feb 16, 2020

eregon commented Feb 16, 2020

MSP-Greg commented Feb 17, 2020

eregon commented Feb 17, 2020

Update Actions #432

Update Actions #432

Conversation

MSP-Greg commented Feb 12, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MSP-Greg Feb 12, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MSP-Greg Feb 13, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eregon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eregon commented Feb 16, 2020

MSP-Greg commented Feb 16, 2020

eregon commented Feb 16, 2020

MSP-Greg commented Feb 17, 2020

eregon commented Feb 17, 2020

MSP-Greg Feb 12, 2020 •

edited

Loading

MSP-Greg Feb 13, 2020 •

edited

Loading