XSF Discussion - 2021-06-16

  1. moparisthebest

    https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2021/06/14/bye-bye-travis-ci/ isn't XSF not eligible for the travis-ci free tier for the same reason?

  2. moparisthebest

    XSF has commercial sponsors right?

  3. eevvoor

    moparisthebest, the sponsors help with the yearly xsf meeting colocated with the FOSS, as fas as I know.

  4. MattJ

    moparisthebest: correct

  5. MattJ

    I haven't even bothered to apply right now - last I checked their dashboard says we have, and have used, no credits

  6. MattJ

    Even if it's just a UI bug, their free credits should last us months at least

  7. eevvoor

    MattJ, whose dashboard?

  8. jonas’


  9. eevvoor

    autobuilds or what jonas’ ?

  10. jonas’

    I don’t quite understand the question

  11. MattJ

    eevvoor, https://travis-ci.com/github/xsf

  12. MattJ

    So according to that we've used 174 minutes in the past month, there are supposedly 10000 free minutes with a free plan, so we have a way to go

  13. MattJ

    I think the answer is migrating to Github Actions whenever we can, before those minutes run out

  14. ralphm

    In almost 5 years :-D

  15. L29Ah

    11:41:20]<MattJ> I think the answer is migrating to Github Actions whenever we can, before those minutes run out migrating from a FOSS solution to a proprietary incompatible spec format?

  16. MattJ

    L29Ah, which is the FOSS solution?

  17. L29Ah

    MattJ: travis

  18. MattJ

    How is it FOSS?

  19. L29Ah

    i don't understand your question; there are sources in their github, the license is specified as MIT in wikipedia

  20. MattJ

    So I see, Wikipedia states "The source is technically free software"

  21. MattJ

    Self-hosting isn't an option for us, especially since this looks like it is not made to be easily self-hosted

  22. MattJ

    and I'm not aware of any other hosted Travis offerings

  23. flow

    I'd welcome making gitlab the primary

  24. flow

    but before we do nothing at all, we should move away from travis, and if it means github actions

  25. MattJ

    As discussed, there's currently no rush... I would rather only migrate once

  26. flow

    MattJ, do we have travis credits now? IIRC last time my PR wasn't CIed by travis due to missing credits

  27. MattJ

    Which PR?

  28. MattJ

    I don't see any PRs from you on relevant repos since February

  29. flow

    IIRC that one wasn't travis'ed https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1063

  30. flow

    ahh, but that was not due credits

  31. flow


  32. flow

    but still, that does not shed a good light on travis, right?

  33. MattJ

    Right, Docker

  34. flow

    if they are reated limited by docker.com

  35. MattJ

    This is a problem with Docker Hub, I guess authentication should be added to the job

  36. MattJ

    I did request an open-source sponsorship from Docker, I don't think I've heard back yet

  37. MattJ

    But that's not really related to this

  38. flow

    well, it is related to travis currently (sometimes?) not being able to CI your PRs

  39. MattJ

    No, it's not

  40. MattJ

    iirc that's simply a distinction between whether you're authenticating to Docker Hub, or pulling over an unauthenticated connection

  41. MattJ

    Unauthenticated pulls now have strict rate limits, which doesn't go well with CI systems obviously

  42. flow

    I was referring to travis in the broadest sense, not just the service. If I understood you correctly, then we could adjust our travis configuration (or something) and it would work again

  43. flow

    but it is not clear to me if this requires an open-source sponsorhip from Docker or something else

  44. MattJ

    No, as I said, the open-source sponsorship from Docker is unrelated to this issue

  45. MattJ

    I just correlated the two things in my mind, I shouldn't have mentioned it :)

  46. flow

    ok, but then we have to add some (our?) docker hub credentials somewhere in the travis file to not run into this rate limit, right?

  47. MattJ

    Likely there is a way in Travis to configure secrets

  48. flow

    hmm, nno, travis file sounds wrong, cause secret

  49. flow

    hmm, no, travis file sounds wrong, cause secret

  50. jonas’

    FWIW, how gitlab solved that issue is that they have a local docker image proxy you can use

  51. jonas’

    I am sure github actions has something similar, travis may too

  52. jonas’

    may just need extra configuration (and the credentials for that would be handed into the job or so)

  53. flow

    Don't docker pull through cachces usually simply have an IP based allowlist?

  54. flow

    and they are configured in the docker daemon json, so outside of the typical travis-ci.yml scope

  55. jonas’

    flow, I work with the gitlab stuff daily. It hands you tokens.

  56. flow

    our gitlab setup uses our docker pull through cache via configuring it in the docker daemon's json configuration file, no tokens involved

  57. flow

    and I would expect that gitlab/travis simply would do the same, if they run their own docker cache, as it does not require any configuration from the users

  58. flow

    ofc i could be wrong

  59. flow

    in any case, the gitlab runner is not aware of the docker cache

  60. flow

    (at least in the setup i know)

  61. jonas’

    ah, the dependency proxy things seems to be token-less now. I recall you had to docker login into it in the beginning, maybe they changed that.

  62. jonas’

    or, more realistically, the runner sets it up on its own

  63. Alex

    I have created the Q3 application page here: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Membership_Applications_Q3_2021

  64. Zash


  65. mathieui

    Thanks Alex

  66. jonas’

    dwd, council?

  67. şişio

    On the Element my messages are lost...

  68. şişio

    XMPP <3

  69. eevvoor

    XMPP is also very good at loosing messages, şişio‎ 🤣️.

  70. eevvoor

    Just wait and enjoy.

  71. eevvoor

    And then hunt the bug.

  72. şişio

    :) Come dm