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
GHA: Replace 3.9 beta with 3.9 final #2420
Conversation
I think it's worth adding a misc change note here |
# Pre-release versions (GH-shipped) | ||
- os: ubuntu-20.04 | ||
python-version: 3.9.0-beta.4 - 3.9.0 | ||
# Pre-release versions (deadsnakes) | ||
- os: ubuntu-20.04 | ||
python-version: 3.9-beta |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's funny that I was just about to submit exactly this change right before seeing your PR. So I ended up sending only the metadata update: #2421.
By the way, the original problem was caused by the upstream bug: |
@jaraco this PR is clear to be merged w/o any extra reviews. We need to get this done ASAP before anything else in order to fix the CI that makes all of the PR submissions look broken while it's broken because it points to a deadsnakes release that is no longer there. |
Summary of changes
The CI is failing because it's failing to set up 3.9-beta via deadsnakes.
Python 3.9.0 final is now available on GitHub Actions as
3.9
.Let's add that, and we can remove the betas:
3.9.0-beta.4 - 3.9.0
from GHA3.9-beta
from deadsnakesI left in the
3.8-dev
and3.9-dev
dev versions from deadsnakes. Still useful to keep them both?I also left in the logic for checking
-beta
, will be useful for when 3.10 reaches beta (or to adapt for alpha). Let me know if you'd prefer it cleaned up.Also we can see from the above that the single failing job caused all the other jobs to be auto-cancelled:
Instead, we can use
fail-fast: false
which allows the other jobs to run. For example:Pull Request Checklist