-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
How can BITS be used in CI? #64
Comments
I think we should define first, what are the set of "actions/commands" that we do when we are testing bits and what we expect out of it. If this is true, then we can create a real set of tests.
If this set of actions works, I think bits is doing its job? |
Different deployments will be a different stages on this list and we could advice on how to test "from this point forward" |
This Issue is not about creating CI for testing BITS, it's about using BITS to set up a bluesky instrument for testing other packages. That will be very soon on my TODO list. |
Like APS-tools? This is what I mean by "create new_instrument" and "create
new_device". We could expand to almost re-create the whole set of GP
devices and test against the GP-container?
…On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 3:57 PM Pete R Jemian ***@***.***> wrote:
This Issue is not about creating CI for testing BITS, it's about using
BITS to set up a bluesky instrument for testing other packages. That will
be very soon on my TODO list.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#64 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEFMPQ6Z4M7VMA2CKWKGIR32U4ZNPAVCNFSM6AAAAABZCRKTW6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDOMZQHEYDSOJQGQ>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
[image: prjemian]*prjemian* left a comment (BCDA-APS/BITS#64)
<#64 (comment)>
This Issue is not about creating CI for testing BITS, it's about using
BITS to set up a bluesky instrument for testing other packages. That will
be very soon on my TODO list.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#64 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEFMPQ6Z4M7VMA2CKWKGIR32U4ZNPAVCNFSM6AAAAABZCRKTW6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDOMZQHEYDSOJQGQ>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Right. The scheme I imagine is to install BITS from the template, then |
I am confused about the |
I've seen that. It is trivial in comparison to what the synApps-based IOC provides. As a test case for developing caproto, it is not realistic for simulating any APS beamline. Fundamentally, the caproto IOC provides EPICS ChannelAccess PVs but lacks the internal database necessary for processing of records by the IOC's internal database management. It cannot simulate the sscan record. Since the sscan record is used copiously at APS for so-called fly scans, the caproto mini beamline is not interesting to test software for use at APS. |
takes BITS as-delivered-from-template and applies a configuration (patch file) from a working instrument in a single step rather than a sequence of steps. The patch file is updated as desired from working instrument configuration (avoids the need to edit the "sequence of steps"). |
It seems this will be something like
Feels pretty clean to me now. |
Might be easier still. Make a repo for the BITS instrument to use, then pick it up in the workflow (from tarball of GitHub repo or clone with minimal depth). |
It is foreseeable to use BITS in CI, such as GitHub Actions workflows. We can provide advice for this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: