I would like to propose we only run Travis on changes to master (push, PR, etc). The problem I am having is pushing broken code to branches for review, testing, etc. is causing Travis to mark the repo as broken in the status image which is not true. Anyone have any other thoughts on this or feel that Travis breaking on branches is at all useful?

+1 - abstractj On Jul 16, 2013, 6:26 PM, Douglas Campos wrote: On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:09:55PM -0500, Kris Borchers wrote: I would like to propose we only run Travis on changes to master (push, PR, etc). The problem I am having is pushing broken code to branches for review, testing, etc. is causing Travis to mark the repo as broken in the status image which is not true. Anyone have any other thoughts on this or feel that Travis breaking on branches is at all useful? +1 I tend to lazily push branches while I'm fixing stuff (and waiting for travis feedback), but I'm fine with travis only running on the branch when I actually open the PR. -- qmx _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

+1 Den onsdagen den 17:e juli 2013 skrev Daniel Passos: +1 On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', &#39;bruno(a)abstractj.org&#39;);&gt;&gt; wrote: +1 - abstractj On Jul 16, 2013, 6:26 PM, Douglas Campos wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:09:55PM -0500, Kris Borchers wrote: >> I would like to propose we only run Travis on changes to >> master (push, >> PR, etc). The problem I am having is pushing broken code to >> branches >> for review, testing, etc. is causing Travis to mark the repo >> as broken >> in the status image which is not true. Anyone have any other >> thoughts >> on this or feel that Travis breaking on branches is at all >> useful? > +1 > > I tend to lazily push branches while I'm fixing stuff (and > waiting for > travis feedback), but I'm fine with travis only running on > the branch > when I actually open the PR. > > -- > qmx > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', > &#39;aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&#39;);&gt; > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', &#39;aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&#39;);&gt; https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

I would like to propose we only run Travis on changes to master (push, PR, etc). The problem I am having is pushing broken code to branches for review, testing, etc. is causing Travis to mark the repo as broken in the status image which is not true. Anyone have any other thoughts on this or feel that Travis breaking on branches is at all useful? _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev