Continuous Integration for Docker & Vagrant builds

[the-paperless-project]

Continuous Integration for Docker & Vagrant builds

[danielquinn]

Should a CI system be introduced?

Absolutely. I was looking into Travis CI just this morning actually.

What exactly are the requirements for the CI?

I'd like it to (at least) run a complete unit test suite, but testing the Dockerfile would also be nice. So long as I can develop and run my unit tests without having to use Docker, I'm cool with it.

Is Travis CI a decent choice? Are there better alternatives?

I've used Travis on other projects and found the GitHub integration to be excellent. I can't speak for alternatives though.

Do we want to cover the Dockerfile and the Vagrantfile?

The stickler in me says that if we're going to develop something and document it, it should be tested in the CI. I say this however knowing full well that there are currently exactly two tests for the whole application, so obviously there's a lot of work to be done here.

To be honest, I don't have a lot of experience writing tests for a Django app (yes, I'm a bad, bad man). I've written lots of tests for Python projects, but for higher-level stuff using a database and externalities like Tesseract and ImageMagick, I'm somewhat sketchy on what can be done for appropriate test coverage. If you, or anyone else have advice, examples, or even pull requests to fill this gap, it would be appreciated.

I'll leave this issue open for a few days to see if anyone else wants to offer insight. If I don't hear anything, I'll setup Travis CI and tell it to execute ./manage.py test.

[pitkley]

[...] testing the Dockerfile would also be nice. So long as I can develop and run my unit tests without having to use Docker, I'm cool with it.

This is definitely an important point: We should add Docker as another way to do things, but not to replace the existing ways and local workflows.

The stickler in me says that if we're going to develop something and document it, it should be tested in the CI. I say this however knowing full well that there are currently exactly two tests for the whole application, so obviously there's a lot of work to be done here.

This is definitely a point to expand on, but introducing CI which not only covers the unittests themselves, but also the two additional runtime-environments we support seems like a good way to move forward.

I'll leave this issue open for a few days to see if anyone else wants to offer insight. If I don't hear anything, I'll setup Travis CI and tell it to execute ./manage.py test.

Sounds reasonable. When you have added and configured Travis, I'll update the Docker PR #39 to update the .travis.yml file similar to how I have already tested it.

[danielquinn]

I know it's late, but I just added a .travis.yml file and setup Travis CI as a webhook. I had to fiddle with the tox configuration a bit because of where I've placed directories etc, but I think it's ok. If you have a cleaner/better way, feel free to issue a PR.

[stgarf]

Looks like #509 may at least satisfy the Docker part of this three year old issue once it is merged.