Re: [BuildStream] Remote-execution testing

[Laurence Urhegyi <laurence urhegyi codethink co uk>]

On 2019-03-26 07:49, Martin Blanchard wrote:
> Hello,
>
> With remote-execution support now being part of the BuildStream 2.0
> plan [1], improving BuildStream's remote-execution client code coverage
> and easing the complexity of spinning up a remote-execution service for
> local testing has become crucial. Below is an list of recent
> improvements that have been made toward these goals.
>
> * Systematic testing in CI:
>
>   A dedicated test job has recently been added to the CI pipeline:
>   'tests-remote-execution' [2]. It runs remote builds of the simple
>   autotools project and uses BuildGrid [3] as remote-execution
>   service. BuildGrid hasn't had any stable release yet, so that CI job
>   relies on nightly images. Considering that there are not stability
>   guaranties using those images, the CI job is allow to fail, thus not
>   blocking a merge.


Thanks a lot for this !

We have already felt the benefit throughout this week: in the YAML 
re-working [0] it helped us catch some breakages in _sanboxremote.py [1] 
and it's also been useful testing CAS support for remote execution [2].

Thanks also to James and Jim who've helped previously as well - it's an 
itch we've wanted to scratch for a while.

Cheers,
Laurence

[0] 
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/buildstream-list/2019-March/msg00017.html
[1] 
https://gitlab.com/BuildStream/buildstream/merge_requests/1257/diffs#d0a5edfc12add9c0522cbf1bbd87e96e0f910f93_110_110
[2] https://gitlab.com/BuildStream/buildstream/merge_requests/1232