When you commit and push code to a Git repository, it can kick off a series of events. A pipeline for your software, as it were. This whole process is often called “continuous integration,” or CI for short. It’s pretty crucial to modern software development and falls under the umbrella of “DevOps” in current developer parlance.
What could a CI process do? Well, let me answer that by telling you what I think a CI process should do. Buckle up, it’s kind of a lot.
First, a few points:
Not all CI should run all the time. You can get really specific with CI on what parts of it run under what conditions. Broadly, I think it makes sense to think of it as 1️⃣ run on any push to any branch, 2️⃣ run against pushes to PR branches only, or 3️⃣ only run on a push to the main branch. I’ve tried to indicate that under each title below.
Things that run in CI very likely don’t only run in CI. You can (and probably do) run all these things locally because you have to view the site, because you’re testing it, or for any other reason it may be advantageous to do so.
There is a concept of commit hooks. I can imagine some level of disagreement with me about what should run in CI, because there is workflow overlap on what hook and CI can do for a team. For example, you could force a pre-commit hook to run tests and prevent the Git push at all if they fail. I’d argue that you should do that, but then also run them in CI. The chances of CI working well are way higher than the chances of any given developer’s machine working well.
Things in CI can fail. That’s part of the point and a strength of CI. If tests fail (for any reason), then the Pull Request (PR) that this CI ran against should be prevented from being merged. CI isn’t just for lookin’ at, it’s for providing real guards.
Chris makes a lot of good points in his post, which is why I wanted to share it. Finding a perfect CI process can be interesting but also important to the software cycle overall.