akash_rawal
The left axis is total number of ratings of each type (Garbage, Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum) in a given month (not per app). For example for month 2016-07 there were
"Garbage" => 22
"Bronze" => 14
"Silver" => 13
"Gold" => 55
"Platinum" => 61
On right side is the average rating. So if I assign values to each rating:
"Garbage" => 1
"Bronze" => 2
"Silver" => 3
"Gold" => 4
"Platinum" => 5
I can get an average rating, which will be between 1 to 5.
((22*1) + (14*2) + (13*3) + (55*4) + (61*5)) / (22 + 14 + 13 + 55 + 61)
~= 3.721
We test our code locally, but we cannot test the workflow. By definition, testing the workflow has to be done on a CI-like system.
There is nektos/act for running github actions locally, it works for simple cases. There still are many differences between act and github actions.
It might be possible for a CI to define workflow steps using Containerfile/Dockerfile. Such workflows would be reproducible locally.
I don’t get it, how would a database container run your unit tests? And unless you know some secret option to stop the database after, say, it is idle for a few seconds, it will continue running.
The purpose is to test database dependent code by spinning up a real database and run your code against that.
For me the value of podman is how easily it works without root. Just install and run, no need for sudo or adding myself to docker group.
I use it for testing and dev work, not for running any services.
Testcontainers uses ‘ryuk’ to clean up containers and it needs docker socket mounted within its container to work. So if you had any hardening config that prevents the docker socket access within a container e.g user namespace or SELinux then Testcontainers doesn’t work.
And I think it would be nice if Testcontainers ‘just worked’ with Podman without any additional steps.
Time for the yearly barrage of “Setup CI”…“Fix CI” commits.
That is my experience with basically every CI service out there.
