Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

changes in travis's build environment#8239

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Merged
tacaswell merged 5 commits intomatplotlib:masterfromNelleV:travis_refactor
Mar 12, 2017
Merged

changes in travis's build environment#8239

tacaswell merged 5 commits intomatplotlib:masterfromNelleV:travis_refactor
Mar 12, 2017

Conversation

NelleV
Copy link
Member

@NelleVNelleV commentedMar 8, 2017
edited
Loading

This is a small refactoring of travis's build environments as well as:

  • removing the python 3.5 build
  • adding a python 2.7 documentation build environment (our documentation recently stopped building under 2.7).

This is still work in progress.

refs#8232

@NelleVNelleV changed the titleDOC changes in travis's build environment[WIP] DOC changes in travis's build environmentMar 8, 2017
echo PYTHONHASHSEED=$PYTHONHASHSEED

echo The following args are passed to pytest $PYTEST_ARGS $RUN_PEP8
if [[ $USE_PYTEST == false ]]; then
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Just remove this outer 'if ..' block and the USE_PYTEST env ?

Copy link
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

My travis knowledge is very limited and I am not sure to understand what you are suggesting. Can you point me towards more details?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

@NelleVNelleV changed the title[WIP] DOC changes in travis's build environment[WIP] changes in travis's build environmentMar 9, 2017
@NelleV
Copy link
MemberAuthor

@anntzer Indeed, the documentation doesn't build on 2.7 anymore.
Nice catch!

@anntzer
Copy link
Contributor

Well that was caught by you organizing the docathon -- I would never have tried it myself :-)

@afvincent
Copy link
Contributor

Well if one really wants to give credit where credit is due, I would say that@aashil may have been first to report documentation build failure with#8145 😈 .

aashil reacted with thumbs up emoji

@NelleV
Copy link
MemberAuthor

NelleV commentedMar 9, 2017
edited
Loading

We still have a huge backlog on appveyor. Merging this PR would help on that matter.
What do you guys think about switching the python2.7 build to allow failure temporarily?

Long term, I agree with Thomas that we should just improve our test coverage, but I think we need to take baby step on this. I am also attempting to see if we could use circle ci to build the documentation which should help us reduce the number of travis build (though appveyor seems to be the pain point right now).

@afvincent
Copy link
Contributor

@NelleV TBH, all these CI tools and servers work are a kind of black magic to me. But what strikes me looking at the scripts is that we have a lot of Python 2.7 builds (~ half of the total amount of builds), which seems almost too many when compared to the diversity of Python 3.3+ that should be tested too. If we allow failure of a Python 2.7 build, “simply” because of the doc, wouldn't it be kind of wasting ressources that could have be used to test stuff on a Python 3 branch?

As I wrote in another thread, I am rather confident that#8165 makes the docs to build again on 2.7 (at least on CentOS 7, it just works© on my local branch). So depending on how urgent it is to clear the queue of CI builds, I would almost suggest to temporarily drop the idea of building the docs on 2.7 in favor of a build that would be more useful about making this queue empty. And I guess we could give another try about building the docs on 2.7 when it will be less a rush for CI ressources. On the other hand, one of my main concern if we were dropping the doc build on 2.7, is that documentation is about to change a lot in avery near future (it's the docathon tsunami :) ), so it may still be relevant to check that the docs buildboth on Python 2 and Python 3.

@NelleV
Copy link
MemberAuthor

The fact that our documentation didn't build under 2.7 for 2 weeks should raise red flags.
The idea behind not testing python3.5 is that 3.4 and 3.6 should cover any regression in 3.5. We could move some of the environments to only test after merge with master.

I am also not convinced that in terms of users, we have such a big difference in 2.7 users and 3 users. My PhD institute, for example, still runs everything by default under 2.7. On the other hand, we have very little developer under 2.7, which explains how we've missed the broken build on 2.7

These are my 2 cents. I do think it is a major problem that our ci tools take that long to build, so reducing the number of builds in general is important (hence moving documentation build to circle-ci). We shouldn't wait 24 hours to get the results. We could blame the docathon for this, but we didn't have such an increase of developers this week. I am quite worried what it means for our next SciPy sprint.

We could also decide to build the documentation only on 3.5, and keep the 2.7 for a nightly build on master only.

@NelleV
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Relating to this, I think we should move the mac osx build to a nightly (ie one per day) build on master and maintenance branch, and not doing it at merge nor on PRs. It's very unreliable.

@dopplershift
Copy link
Contributor

I agree about OSX. I love using Travis, but on my other projects there is absolutely no way I'm waiting for that build queue to see about my PRs.

@tacaswell
Copy link
Member

👍 to moving 2.7 docs to nightly, tentative 👍 to moving OSX.

What does the reporting on the success/failure fo the periodic jobs look like?

@tacaswelltacaswell added this to the2.1 (next point release) milestoneMar 10, 2017
@dopplershift
Copy link
Contributor

If you want to be notified, you need to have email notifications. Otherwise, it just shows up as another build in the history.

@NelleV
Copy link
MemberAuthor

I'll investigate this. I think we need to make sure that our CI scales up for the scipy sprint: it is a shame to be slowed down because of our CI tools :)

@NelleV
Copy link
MemberAuthor

None of what I was proposing is going to work out of the box. I suggest we leave it as is for now and see if it helps with the travis and appveyor queue.

@NelleVNelleV changed the title[WIP] changes in travis's build environment[MRG] changes in travis's build environmentMar 11, 2017
@anntzer
Copy link
Contributor

Restarted the 2.7 doc build now that#8165 was merged.

@tacaswelltacaswell merged commita4cee9d intomatplotlib:masterMar 12, 2017
@QuLogicQuLogic changed the title[MRG] changes in travis's build environmentchanges in travis's build environmentMar 12, 2017
@NelleVNelleV deleted the travis_refactor branchMarch 13, 2017 16:11
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@tacaswelltacaswelltacaswell left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v2.1
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants
@NelleV@anntzer@afvincent@dopplershift@tacaswell

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp