Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[WIP] Remove Travis and Azure files #6470

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from
Closed

[WIP] Remove Travis and Azure files #6470

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

nicoddemus
Copy link
Member

@nicoddemus nicoddemus commented Jan 15, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Fix #6369

blueyed
blueyed suggested changes Jan 15, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@blueyed blueyed left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Misses coverage then.
Even with #6463 already.

Also, is deployment done via GHA already? found it: #6468 👍

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member Author

Misses coverage then.

Yep realized that now that we are only building with GH actions. Last commit tries to improve this, let's see.

@nicoddemus nicoddemus mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2020
Closed
@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member Author

nicoddemus commented Jan 15, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Unfortunately had to re-add the no cover pragmas for < 3.5.2, as that Python version is not available in GitHub actions:

##[error]Version 3.5.1 with arch x64 not found
Available versions:

2.7.16 (x64)
3.5.7 (x64)
3.6.9 (x64)
3.7.5 (x64)
3.8.0 (x64)

@RonnyPfannschmidt
Copy link
Member

how reasonable is it to make 3.5.7 the minimal supported version in the next feature release?

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member Author

how reasonable is it to make 3.5.7 the minimal supported version in the next feature release?

No idea how widespread is Python <3.5.2... @The-Compiler might chime in here (he seems to be aware about this topic in general 😁 )

@blueyed
Copy link
Contributor

blueyed commented Jan 15, 2020

Unfortunately had to re-add the no cover pragmas for < 3.5.2, as that Python version is not available in GitHub actions:

Why not leave it "uncovered" then?

I'd be ok with dropping < 3.5.2, but would have like to had known it before #6435 then.. ;) (IIRC it was said there to keep it).

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member Author

I'd be ok with dropping < 3.5.2, but would have like to had known it before #6435 then.. ;) (IIRC it was said there to keep it).

It is not a done deal, IIRC someone had asked to keep supporting < 3.5.2... I just seem to recall @njsmith had mentioned trio still supported <3.5.2 so we decided to do it as well (I might be wrong though).

@nicoddemus nicoddemus force-pushed the cleanup-old-ci branch 2 times, most recently from 9a3b417 to 7ace359 Compare January 15, 2020 13:31
@The-Compiler
Copy link
Member

No idea how widespread is Python <3.5.2... @The-Compiler might chime in here (he seems to be aware about this topic in general )

I'd say it's not very common. I dropped support for it in qutebrowser and nobody seemed to care. I've also seen various projects (e.g. jaraco.functools) drop 3.5 support altogether already.

Ubuntu 16.04 LTS also ships 3.5.2 (its python3 package is at 3.5.1, but python3.5 is at 3.5.2, and it does seem to be 3.5.2).

python-trio/trio#880 also has some notes.

Then again, a test runner is a bit in a special position there...

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member Author

@blueyed can you please give some insights on the missing coverage? Most seems to be debug related, but I'm not seeing any configuration in Travis to suggest that those lines should be covered in the first place. Thanks!

@hugovk
Copy link
Member

hugovk commented Jan 15, 2020

GitHub Actions:

We'll keep Python 2.7 on the image for ~6 months after it EOL's so people have time to move over.

Which aligns quite well with "mid-2020" for pytest 4.6 supporting 2.7:

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member Author

Still can't figure out why removing Travis has changed the coverage; AFAICT the GHA builds are reproducing what we had on .travis.yml... @blueyed a little help? 😁

@blueyed
Copy link
Contributor

blueyed commented Jan 16, 2020

@blueyed a little help?

Plan to look into it later, but might take some days.

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member Author

Plan to look into it later, but might take some days.

OK, thanks.

nicoddemus added a commit to nicoddemus/pytest that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2020
@nicoddemus
Drop deploy from Travis in favor of GitHub actions
d1d7e5d 
GitHub actions already should deploy.

This is a stop gap while we figure out why coverage dropped
when removing Travis builds in pytest-dev#6470
@nicoddemus nicoddemus mentioned this pull request Jan 16, 2020
Merged
@Zac-HD Zac-HD mentioned this pull request Jan 17, 2020
Merged
blueyed added a commit to blueyed/pytest that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2020
@blueyed
ci: Travis: remove non-coverage jobs
4c68404 
This helps with regard to slowness until
pytest-dev#6470 is resolved.
@blueyed blueyed mentioned this pull request Jan 18, 2020
Merged
blueyed added a commit to blueyed/pytest that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2020
@blueyed
ci: Travis: remove non-coverage jobs
a7292a0 
This helps with regard to slowness until
pytest-dev#6470 is resolved.
blueyed pushed a commit to blueyed/pytest that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2020
@nicoddemus @blueyed
Drop deploy from Travis in favor of GitHub actions
2bc1c2c 
GitHub actions already should deploy.

This is a stop gap while we figure out why coverage dropped
when removing Travis builds in pytest-dev#6470

(cherry picked from commit d1d7e5d)
blueyed added a commit to blueyed/pytest that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2020
@blueyed
ci: Travis: remove non-coverage jobs
ff88d57 
This helps with regard to slowness until
pytest-dev#6470 is resolved.

(cherry picked from commit a7292a0)
blueyed pushed a commit to blueyed/pytest that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2020
@nicoddemus @blueyed
Drop deploy from Travis in favor of GitHub actions
40d0031 
GitHub actions already should deploy.

This is a stop gap while we figure out why coverage dropped
when removing Travis builds in pytest-dev#6470

(cherry picked from commit d1d7e5d)
blueyed added a commit to blueyed/pytest that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2020
@blueyed
ci: Travis: remove non-coverage jobs
89f92a4 
This helps with regard to slowness until
pytest-dev#6470 is resolved.

(cherry picked from commit a7292a0)
@nicoddemus @blueyed
Rename append-codecov-token script for consistency
8a60849 
Other scripts use `-` instead of `_` as word separators given
that they are supposed to be executed, never imported.
@blueyed blueyed force-pushed the cleanup-old-ci branch 4 times, most recently from 3fcd5f6 to 60b6892 Compare January 21, 2020 17:59
@blueyed blueyed changed the title Remove Travis and Azure files [WIP] Remove Travis and Azure files Jan 23, 2020
blueyed
blueyed reviewed Jan 23, 2020
View reviewed changes
tox.ini
@@ -167,7 +166,7 @@ filterwarnings =
default:Using or importing the ABCs:DeprecationWarning:unittest2.*
default:the imp module is deprecated in favour of importlib:DeprecationWarning:nose.*
ignore:Module already imported so cannot be rewritten:pytest.PytestWarning
# produced by python3.6/site.py itself (3.6.7 on Travis, could not trigger it with 3.6.8).
# produced by python3.6/site.py itself
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This info could/should stay.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agreed. 👍

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member Author

Superseded by #6463.

@nicoddemus nicoddemus closed this Jan 30, 2020
@nicoddemus nicoddemus deleted the cleanup-old-ci branch January 30, 2020 23:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@blueyed blueyed blueyed requested changes

@RonnyPfannschmidt RonnyPfannschmidt RonnyPfannschmidt approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Include deploy and coverage in GitHub actions
5 participants
@nicoddemus @RonnyPfannschmidt @blueyed @The-Compiler @hugovk