-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 557
Add minimal Makefile #2940
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add minimal Makefile #2940
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's a really good idea, thanks for working on this.
I've dropped some comments.
I also want @pierreprinetti's feedback on the structure (unit vs lint, what to run) etc.
I propose the desired end goals being:
- We don't call commands directly, but rather write scripts in
./scripts
. - Makefile targets are coherent (running the right thing for lint, for unit, etc) and consistent with our CI jobs.
- Our CI jobs run
make
instead of calling scripts.
Mostly agreed with one change suggested.
I'd prefer that we got rid of the scripts and use Makefile targets directly. The scripts encourage workarounds and hacks rather than doing things "properly" (such as writing skips for tests that need specific configuration, as fixed in #3005, or structure)
Agreed.
Agreed. |
To quickly run linters, unit tests and potentially acceptance tests against a local DevStack. We will eventually add golangci-lint to the 'lint' target but that's a larger piece of work that should be done separately. We should also rework the GitHub Actions jobs to use these targets and remove the scripts, but that requires more work on job skips to be able to do that. Signed-off-by: Stephen Finucane <[email protected]>
This wasn't addressed, what's the plan? |
I plan to address this separately once #3005 is merged. We can't do it sooner than that as we need to manually specify skips and that's not easily possible with these targets. |
@pierreprinetti you good with this? |
Nice addition, thanks |
Does what it says on this tin.