Travis CI configuration

[yamt]

No description provided.

[yamt]

This would have caught a recent bug: #181

[yamt]

This patch is the step 4, 5 of https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/tutorial/#to-get-started-with-travis-ci
Someone with permission on this repo can do the step 1, 2, 3.

[xiaoxiang781216]

This patch is the step 4, 5 of https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/tutorial/#to-get-started-with-travis-ci
Someone with permission on this repo can do the step 1, 2, 3.

We have to use Jenkins and server from Apache to conform Apache requirement:
#174
If you are interesting in setup the automation build and test, @liuguo09, @maht and you can work together.
Also, per the discussion, all CI related stuff is put here:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing

[yamt]

even if you don't activate it on this repo, this is convenient for people working on their fork on github.

[davids5]

What is the harm in merging this to see how well it works. Is it not completely low-risk?

[patacongo]

This change seems out of place with the other commits in the PR. Perhaps it should be a separate PR?

[yamt]

this change is required by other changes as otherwise ./nuttx just hangs after running the tests.

[patacongo]

PLEASE FIX: All .sh files reequire (currently) a BSD 3-clause license. No unlicensed shell scripts may come in.

(License will, eventually, be changed to Apache).

[yamt]

i added apache license

[patacongo]

Question: Do .yml files require licenses and headers? I would think the answer is YES. ??

I think that basically any that "executes" needs a license header.

[yamt]

i added apache license to this file too as this yaml file contains shell script snippets.

[justinmclean]

ASF policy on headers is reasonable clear [1], but if in doubt add a header. BSD headers should not be added to new files ASF ALv2 headers should be used.

1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers

[yamt]

i added apache license to shell scripts

[yamt]

any takers? eventually i want to add windows build which i can't test locally. i guess it's possible as travis ci provides windows env.

[maht]

I think is great to have this code available, but maybe it should be placed in incubator-nuttx-testing, as requested by @patacongo [1] and others.

Maybe this preference of a separate repo for the CI code is not settled on stone and it can be reconsidered, but other people then will require to put their own scripts on main repo.

Can the CircleCI script be rewritten to clone the testing repo and move the logic there? I know maybe is a PITA to move it, but maybe would be easier to be accepted, and that is what I have been doing for other CI scripts, like the Jenkins one I have under review in that repo: put a "placeholder" Jenkinsfile in main repo so the CI can "hook" to it and the actual logic in the testing one.

[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@nuttx.apache.org/msg00436.html

[xiaoxiang781216]

Hi @yamt , @liuguo09 will look this patch and try to integrate with cibuild.sh. Since github could:
1.Provide Linux/MacOS/Windows VM
2.The computing power is better than Apache
3.Integrate with the workflow smoothly
We are considering using github as PR check and apache as nightly build. @liuguo09 will send the current state and plan to dev@nuttx.apache.org for furture discussion.

[xiaoxiang781216]

any takers? eventually i want to add windows build which i can't test locally. i guess it's possible as travis ci provides windows env.

@yamt could you look this PR:
#261
Which provide a unified framework to the precheck for all configs in Linux env, but it design to cover macOS and Windows in mind, so you can provide the patch to enable Windows/macOS check.

[xiaoxiang781216]

Let's track CI issue by:
#261