Skip to content
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

Switch Travis config to use arm64 architecture by default #349

Open
6 of 22 tasks
roborourke opened this issue May 16, 2022 · 2 comments
Open
6 of 22 tasks

Switch Travis config to use arm64 architecture by default #349

roborourke opened this issue May 16, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
should have Should be done, medium priority for now

Comments

@roborourke
Copy link
Contributor

roborourke commented May 16, 2022

Since Local Server supports Arm builds now we can switch Travis to use Arm chips by default. This should have the following benefits:

  • Usually smaller docker image sizes
  • Faster execution time

We should start with an experiment and benchmark some existing module tests e.g. for this repo and see what difference using arm makes.

Acceptance criteria:

For Altis Team Use

Ready for Work Checklist

Is this ticket ready to be worked on? See
the Play Book Definition of Ready

  • Is the title clear?
  • Is the description clear and detailed enough?
  • Are acceptance criteria listed?
  • Have any dependencies been identified? (Optional)
  • Have any documentation/playbook changes been identified? (Optional)
  • Is an estimate or time box assigned?
  • Is a priority label assigned?
  • Is this ticket added to a milestone?
  • Is this ticket added to an epic? (Optional)

Completion Checklist

Is this ticket done? See
the Play Book Definition of Done

  • Has the acceptance criteria been met?
  • Is the documentation updated (including README)?
  • Do any code/documentation changes meet project standards?
  • Are automatic tests in place to verify the fix or new functionality?
    • Or are manual tests documented (at least on this ticket)?
  • Are any Playbook/Handbook pages updated?
  • Has a new module release (patch/minor) been created/scheduled?
  • Have the appropriate backport labels been added to the PR?
  • Is there a roll-out (and roll-back) plan if required?
@roborourke roborourke added to-refine-dev should have Should be done, medium priority for now labels May 16, 2022
@mikelittle
Copy link
Contributor

Added an extra acceptance criterion. It would be good to note the speed improvement (and maybe the size improvement too) as we are looking at the difference.

@veselala veselala added to refine Issues needing refinement. and removed to-refine-dev labels Jun 15, 2022
@wisyhambolu
Copy link
Contributor

Hey team! Please add your planning poker estimate with Zenhub @jerico @kovshenin @mikelittle

@wisyhambolu wisyhambolu removed the to refine Issues needing refinement. label Oct 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
should have Should be done, medium priority for now
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants