New Contributor Setup

[willhansen]

I've been trying to get the develop branch just compiling and passing tests to get started, and I'm curious how far off I am from the "standard" route.

I had to tweak a few things in the docker/task.dockerfile file. (diff)

Commands:

git clone -b docker-workflow [email protected]:willhansen/taskwarrior.git && \
cd taskwarrior && \
./docker/build_and_run_in_docker.bash

In the container:

./run_tests.bash

Passes all tests.

[djmitche]

That Dockerfile is used in CI to build a docker image that is pushed to ghcr.io. I think that's why it doesn't care much for caching, and uses the tag foo.

That said, I don't actually see a run of that action -- but that's another issue.

Your changes make sense as a way to run the tests from develop, but I"m not sure it's the best way to actually do development, just because it will do a clean build on every run.

The "standard" route is documented here, if that helps. It does require a fairly new CMake, a C++ compiler, and a Rust toolchain.

[felixschurk]

That Dockerfile is used in CI to build a docker image that is pushed to ghcr.io. I think that's why it doesn't care much for caching, and uses the tag foo.

That said, I don't actually see a run of that action -- but that's another issue.

Your changes make sense as a way to run the tests from develop, but I"m not sure it's the best way to actually do development, just because it will do a clean build on every run.

The "standard" route is documented here, if that helps. It does require a fairly new CMake, a C++ compiler, and a Rust toolchain.

https://github.com/GothenburgBitFactory/taskwarrior/actions/workflows/docker-image.yaml

I think these are the corresponding action runs - however all are basically failed.

[willhansen]

I am wondering what is the difference to the already existing .devcontainer setup?

At least to my understanding the "result" is similar, one has a docker container in which one can do the development - without the need to install CMake, Rust etc. locally.

Even less than that, really. I just wanted an easy way to effectively run the CI locally with a one-liner.

I looked into the .devcontainer stuff until I realized it seemed pretty Visual Studio centric and lost interest.

[felixschurk]

Ah okay. Now I get the idea.
Devcontainer can also be used with Clion, but the original idea comes from Visual Studio and Visual Studio Code. I do not know which other IDE's also support it.

I think it does not make a lot of sense to add it to the repo, as it would add another 'similar' way of developing and one would also need to be taken care of.
I am also not sure how it would behave with pushing out of the container, I assume one would need to setup new git credentials every time the container is freshly installed?

What we could do is using the existing push to docker action, and maybe provide this docker image to be pulled down?
Such that people could pull latest develop from a docker image?

[djmitche]

Over the last few months we've removed a number of off-the-beaten-path things that had fallen out of date, so I agree with not adding a new one. Having a single "well-lit path" for development seems a better choice for a project with this level of activity.

That docker-push idea sounds pretty cool, though!

[willhansen]

Big thumbs up for a single well-lit path. Keeping a bunch of overlapping build systems around would either need way too much maintenance or they'd start to fall by the wayside.