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.

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

[v3.0] Add newer Python 3 versions to build matrix #1111

Merged
merged 16 commits into from Nov 3, 2019

Conversation

adamantike
Copy link
Contributor

For the 3.0 branch, add newer Python versions to the build matrix, up
to Python 3.7.

This is motivated by #1100, which backported a fix for the 3.0 branch
to work with Python 3.7.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 91.757% when pulling ad98029 on adamantike:3.0-add-support-for-newer-python into 4249443 on celery:3.0.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Oct 19, 2019

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-10.4%) to 81.32% when pulling 74dc1ed on adamantike:3.0-add-support-for-newer-python into 4249443 on celery:3.0.

@adamantike adamantike force-pushed the 3.0-add-support-for-newer-python branch 3 times, most recently from efd9deb to 8162e75 Compare October 19, 2019 18:52
@adamantike adamantike changed the title [v3.0] Add newer Python 3 versions to build matrix [v3.0] [WIP] Add newer Python 3 versions to build matrix Oct 19, 2019
@adamantike adamantike force-pushed the 3.0-add-support-for-newer-python branch 9 times, most recently from 6bacd26 to 7610f0d Compare October 20, 2019 04:17
For the `3.0` branch, add newer Python versions to the build matrix, up
to Python 3.7.

This is motivated by celery#1100, which backported a fix for the `3.0` branch
to work with Python 3.7.
@adamantike adamantike force-pushed the 3.0-add-support-for-newer-python branch from 7610f0d to 902a07c Compare October 20, 2019 04:19
@adamantike
Copy link
Contributor Author

@auvipy ping for awareness! With these changes to the 3.0 branch, only the pypy build is currently failing in Travis, and everything from AppVeyor. Let me know if it makes sense to keep working on them, before putting more effort into it.

Hopefully, this could allow us to have another 3.x release, compatible with newer Python versions :)

Copy link
Member

@auvipy auvipy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

drop EOL py versions

.travis.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.travis.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.travis.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@adamantike
Copy link
Contributor Author

I would gladly remove those versions! As it would be a breaking change for those Python versions, I wasn't sure of the approach you take on this project, as this commit will be tagged as minor/patch within the 3.0 branch. If that's OK, I will proceed with those changes.

@auvipy
Copy link
Member

auvipy commented Oct 23, 2019

It's normal to drop the python version reaching EOL. we are not supposed to support celery 3.x as well but doing so for the sake of easier migration to 4.x versions.

@adamantike
Copy link
Contributor Author

AppVeyor is now fixed by using almost the same configuration as master. The only pending one is the pypy environment in Travis, which of course, passes when running tests locally.

@auvipy
Copy link
Member

auvipy commented Oct 24, 2019

can you update pypy2.7 to 7.2?

@adamantike
Copy link
Contributor Author

I don't see pypy2.7-7.2 still supported by Travis, considering its nightly builder, and its documentation. That's why I'm using the same PyPy versions we test in master.

@auvipy
Copy link
Member

auvipy commented Oct 24, 2019

I added it on celery master, check it

@adamantike
Copy link
Contributor Author

adamantike commented Oct 24, 2019

I can add it to check if it works, but that environment didn't run for your PR: https://travis-ci.org/celery/celery/builds/601834152, and I don't see it running afterwards because it's in the lint stage, which is only executed if the previous stage is successful, while has been failing consistently in master celery.

@adamantike
Copy link
Contributor Author

adamantike commented Oct 24, 2019

I tested both pypy2.7-7.2 and pypy2.7-7.2.0, and Travis fails with:

Downloading archive: https://storage.googleapis.com/travis-ci-language-archives/python/binaries/ubuntu/16.04/x86_64/pypy2.7-7.2.tar.bz2
0.13s$ curl -sSf -o pypy2.7-7.2.tar.bz2 ${archive_url}
curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404 Not Found
Unable to download pypy2.7-7.2 archive. The archive may not exist. Please consider a different version.

(from https://travis-ci.org/celery/kombu/jobs/602304400)

@auvipy
Copy link
Member

auvipy commented Oct 24, 2019

OK stick with 7.1.x

@adamantike adamantike changed the title [v3.0] [WIP] Add newer Python 3 versions to build matrix [v3.0] Add newer Python 3 versions to build matrix Oct 26, 2019
@adamantike
Copy link
Contributor Author

So, I still don't know why the pypy environment fails in Travis, where this simple assertion about installed codecs fails:

import codecs
codecs.lookup('ascii')

My guess is that the PyPy installation provided by Travis is missing something, but I don't think it should block this PR from being merged.

This pull request is now ready for review. After this one, I will check if migrating the test suite to PyTest makes any difference to fix that breaking environment.

@adamantike
Copy link
Contributor Author

@auvipy, let me know if is there anything else I should add to this PR, to be merged.

Copy link
Member

@auvipy auvipy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

OK. moving to pytest makes sense.

@auvipy auvipy merged commit a03530c into celery:3.0 Nov 3, 2019
@adamantike adamantike deleted the 3.0-add-support-for-newer-python branch November 3, 2019 14:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants