EDM-based CI #365
EDM-based CI #365
Conversation
|
Basically looks good to me. Obvious improvements would be:
but those are all second order compared to getting this into master. |
|
I would remove all the tomfoolery concerning pillow in |
.travis.yml
Outdated
| cache: | ||
| - pip | ||
| - ccache | ||
|
|
||
| addons: | ||
| apt: | ||
| packages: | ||
| - python-qt4 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
since we use the edm binary packages we should not need to install python* packages and zlibg-dev, libpng-dev, libfreetype6-dev from apt
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good call, thanks. Updated.
| matrix: | ||
| include: | ||
| - env: RUNTIME=2.7 TOOLKIT=wx | ||
| - env: RUNTIME=2.7 TOOLKIT=pyqt |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason why pyside is not included in the matrix jobs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No particular one, other than that I looked at the current Travis file and misread what it does. I'll add PySide.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added a configuration for PySide under 2.7.
ci/edmtool.py
Outdated
| installed to access required source code from github repositories. | ||
| You can then do:: | ||
| python edmtool.py install --runtime=... --toolkit=... | ||
| to create a test environment from the current codebase and:: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Adding some empty lines will improve readability in these sections
|
Looks good from this end |
|
Thanks all, merging. @corranwebster I'll take a shot at OS X and Windows soon. |
|
Nice work! Any insights to be added to enthought/enable#281? |
@jwiggins Just one perhaps: Ioannis pointed out that installing the python-* packages via apt is no longer necessary, so it looks like those could be removed from the Enable setup as well. Other than that, nothing to add: the Python code is copied in its entirety from your branch. |
Cleaned-up version of #364
This adapts the EDM-based CI code for Enable in enthought/enable#281 to Chaco. The biggest change is to run the backend tests in addition to the standard tests (however, judging from the README we could probably move the backend tests back in with the rest of the tests).
@corranwebster @itziakos @jwiggins Would you mind taking a look?