Re: [PATCH] .travis.yml: Add description to each job

[Wainer dos Santos Moschetta <wainersm@redhat.com>]

On 1/28/20 11:18 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 1:55 PM Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> writes:
>>> On 25/01/2020 19.31, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>>> The NAME variable can be used to describe nicely a job (see [*]).
>>>> As we currently have 32 jobs, use it. This helps for quickly
>>>> finding a particular job.
>>>>
>>>>    before: https://travis-ci.org/qemu/qemu/builds/639887646
>>>>    after: https://travis-ci.org/philmd/qemu/builds/641795043
>>> Very good idea, correlating a job in the GUI to an entry in the yml file
>>> was really a pain, so far.
>>>
>>>> [*] https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/customizing-the-build/#naming-jobs-within-matrices
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>   .travis.yml | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>>>>   1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/.travis.yml b/.travis.yml
>>>> index 6c1038a0f1..d68e35a2c5 100644
>>>> --- a/.travis.yml
>>>> +++ b/.travis.yml
>>>> @@ -94,24 +94,28 @@ after_script:
>>>>
>>>>   matrix:
>>>>     include:
>>>> -    - env:
>>>> +    - name: "[x86] GCC static (user)"
>>> Could you please drop the [x86] and other architectures from the names?
>>> Travis already lists the build architecture in the job status page, so
>>> this information is redundant.
>> Hmm for me the Travis page mis-renders the architecture (on firefox) so
>> I do find the arch in the text fairly handy.
> This might be a font problem, I can't see the architecture on neither
> Firefox nor Chrome:
>
> https://pasteboard.co/IS3O358.png


It is the partially hidden column between the job number and the penguin 
(or apple if MacOS).

Funny, I can see the arch on Philippe's dashboard 
(https://travis-ci.org/philmd/qemu) but it disappears on my own 
(https://travis-ci.org/wainersm/qemu).

Anyway, most of the jobs run on x86_64. So perhaps mark only the non-x86 
ones?

- Wainer

>
>