[tor-bugs] #22943 [Core Tor/Stem]: Add Travis CI configuration so that Github forks receive CI coverage

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#22943: Add Travis CI configuration so that Github forks receive CI coverage
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
 Reporter:  patrickod                            |          Owner:  atagar
     Type:  enhancement                          |         Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium                               |      Milestone:
Component:  Core Tor/Stem                        |        Version:
 Severity:  Normal                               |     Resolution:
 Keywords:  continuous-integration ci unit-      |  Actual Points:
  testing testing new-developers travis best-    |
  practice                                       |
Parent ID:                                       |         Points:
 Reviewer:                                       |        Sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Changes (by isis):

 * status:  needs_information => new


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:1 atagar]:
 > Hi Patrick, Stem already has CI via Jenkins...
 >
 > https://jenkins.torproject.org/job/stem-tor-ci/
 >
 > They're broken at the moment but that's another story...
 >
 > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/22790
 >
 > Folks indeed make GitHub forks to send me pull requests but I'm unsure
 why CI would be important to them. They pull from master, make their
 change, run tests, and send me a pull request. It's not a long-lived fork.
 If it is they'd certainly be welcome to add this to themselves.
 >
 > Is there something I'm missing?

 In terms of the benefits to newcomers, I think of it more as a friendly
 way of saying "here's what I expect to pass if you fork my code and change
 it" and giving new developers a super easy way to prove to you (before you
 spend time on code review) that they met that expectation.

 W.r.t. benefits to core maintainers/developers, I find it's really nice to
 not have to wait until something is in the master (or whichever
 maintenance branch) of the official main repo to know if something broke,
 or if it had a bad reaction with something else that was merged, etc.
 (This is maybe more beneficial to things like little-t tor which have a
 lot of people hacking in different directions all at once, but Stem
 contributors are also growing and it's getting a lot of love from
 different people.) Also for me, I feel like it makes the development
 workflow much faster, because instead of "make commit, run tests locally,
 wait, repeat" it's more like "make commit, push, repeat, (possibly get
 notified of breakage and make a fixup commit)".  It also serves to assure
 me that it's not "just working on my machine" but that another machine out
 there is able to get the same test results. Also, it's somehow incredibly
 satisfying to watch e.g. https://travis-
 ci.org/isislovecruft/bridgedb/builds/ and see all the little icons turn
 from yellow to (usually, hopefully) green.

 I can probably go on and on more about how great it is to have CI
 everywhere all the time, if you want more reasons. :)

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/22943#comment:2>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online