Issue #16234 has been updated by jaruga (Jun Aruga).


> Good call :)
> For Arm CI, let's try it when we have a chance, to unify what tools we use.

Yes, first let's try it.

> My original interest to Drone CI mainly comes from the Solaris environment capability. Because of [Misc #15347], having GitHub-integrated CI of Oracle Developer Studio 12.x would be helpful despite the RubyCI existence, compared to other missing environments like FreeBSD / OpenBSD / NetBSD (which might be still worth consideration if we decided to use Drone CI for a long term).

> Comparing the maintenance cost and benefits, if Arm on Travis works fine and we cannot easily use Oracle Developer Studio 12 on Drone CI, maybe we should drop Drone CI, given that most of their coverage is well-maintained in RubyCI anyway.

Sure, agree. First let's try ARM 64/32-bit cases on Travis. After it works, let's drop Drone CI.


----------------------------------------
Misc #16234: Enabling ARM 64/32-bit cases by Drone CI
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16234#change-81956

* Author: jaruga (Jun Aruga)
* Status: Closed
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Currently ruby project has 4 CIs on GitHub.

1. Travis CI: linux cases with flags and compilers.
2. GitHub Actions: macros, windows, ubuntu
3. Wercker: Ruby JIT cases
4. Appveyor: windows

I like to suggest 5th CI: Drone CI for ARM 64/32-bit cases.
Drone CI supports native the ARM 64/32 bit environments.
Have you used Drone CI?

I tried to use both Drone CI and Shippable CI supporting ARM.
My impression for Drone CI is quite good. Great user experience and user interface.
Shippable CI was not so good for some reasons.

Drone CI have not only linux ARM 64/32 bit environments on DockerRunner mode (= using container for CI like Wercker), but also freebsd, netbsd, openbsd, dragonfly (?) and solaris environments on ExecRunner (= maybe running commands directly without container) mode according to the following documents.
* https://exec-runner.docs.drone.io/configuration/platform/
* https://docker-runner.docs.drone.io/configuration/platform/

Is it exciting isn't it?
We can check ARM issue at a pull-request timing.

Here is the example. The content is almost same with wercker.yml except JIT option.
"ruby/3" is failed on the latest master branch, but "ruby/2" arm64 case is succeeded on old master branch.
https://cloud.drone.io/junaruga/ruby/3
https://github.com/junaruga/ruby/blob/feature/ci-arm/.drone.yml
https://cloud.drone.io/junaruga/ruby/2
Here is the pull-request as an example.
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/2520

.drone.yml is the file to manage the CI cases.
But when you see most of the YAML parts between ARM 64-bit and 32-bit cases in .drone.yml is same. In case of .traivs.yml, we are using YAML anchor (&) and reference (*) feature effectively. But in case of .drone.yml I am not sure we can still use it beyond the "---" separator. Luckily Drone CI started providing the alternative .drone.star file by Starlark language.
https://docs.drone.io/starlark/overview/
https://blog.drone.io/create-pipelines-using-starlark/

Enabling Drone CI is quite simple.
Just go to https://drone.io/ , then register and enable target repository. UI is quite good.

Pros

* We can check ARM 64/32-bit cases, and possibly freebsd and solaris cases too.
* It's for free.
* Each developer can debug ARM cases on their forked repository.
* Customize easily. I see .travis.yml is used effectively.

Cons

* Have to manage additonal file .drone.yml or .drone.star.

But first, I want to ask you. Are you interested in using Drone CI for Ruby project?




-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>