Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Trial GitHub Actions vs Cirrus CI #4191

Closed
trexfeathers opened this issue Jun 11, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Trial GitHub Actions vs Cirrus CI #4191

trexfeathers opened this issue Jun 11, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@trexfeathers
Copy link
Contributor

📰 Custom Issue

@ocefpaf has correctly pointed out (SciTools/cf-units#175, SciTools/nc-time-axis#66) that GHA is the most popular CI implementation for scientific Python projects. Given that barriers to involvement are a big factor in the health of a project: we need a really good reason to go against the crowd as we do now using Cirrus CI.

I believe our reasons for using Cirrus are to minimise the runtime for a full CI run. We should therefore do a trial to see if it possible to get similar/faster runtime using GHA instead. I'm told that GHA also has caching solutions like Cirrus does, and the minutes are free for public repositories so there should be no trouble with parallelism.

@trexfeathers
Copy link
Contributor Author

I probably shouldn't have been so quick to shoot down @jamesp's idea on SciTools/iris-grib#242!

@rcomer
Copy link
Member

rcomer commented Jun 11, 2021

Cartopy went to GHA in December SciTools/cartopy#1691

@SciTools SciTools locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 11, 2021

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants