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

Travis: use Ubuntu Xenial, pypy3, coverage #208

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Feb 14, 2019

Conversation

blueyed
Copy link
Contributor

@blueyed blueyed commented Feb 13, 2019

No description provided.

@blueyed
Copy link
Contributor Author

blueyed commented Feb 13, 2019

@nicoddemus
Do you feel like adding coverage reporting to codecov for AppVeyor? (should use a windows flag then probably, but I skipped using flags for now - this appears to trigger timeouts on codecov still)

@blueyed blueyed changed the title Travis: use Ubuntu Xenial, add pypy3 Travis: use Ubuntu Xenial, pypy3, coverage Feb 13, 2019
@blueyed
Copy link
Contributor Author

blueyed commented Feb 13, 2019

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member

TBH I'm not entirely happy with codecov in general, we have been having frequent problems with it: connection resets during builds causing them to fail (albeit in the last week or so I have not seen those anymore), and coverage changes that we could not explain (doc only changes making coverage drop for example).

What is your opinion?

@blueyed
Copy link
Contributor Author

blueyed commented Feb 14, 2019

Yes, codecov can be annoying (mostly the connection timeouts, but this might be caused by using (many) flags after all).
No idea really about the coverage changes being off - this might also be the reporting itself (coveragepy), or some misconfiguration on our side (pytest repo).

I've started investigating other providers, but in general (if it is working) codecov is still one of the best.

@blueyed
Copy link
Contributor Author

blueyed commented Feb 14, 2019

We can leave coverage out of this PR for now, but I've figured that it would be helpful with checking if we miss something (I've started to add support / fixes for newer pytest).

@blueyed
Copy link
Contributor Author

blueyed commented Feb 14, 2019

Primarily I wanted to get CI going again here.

Copy link
Member

@nicoddemus nicoddemus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fair enough, that's a worthy endeavor! 🤗

Please see my comments. 👍

#- DEPS="pytest~=3.1.0"
- DEPS="pytest~=2.9.0"
- DEPS="pytest~=3.0.0"
#- DEPS="pytest~=3.1.0"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

commented out?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Before already, just indented.
Would be changed in the next step, e.g. by testing against pytest 4.2.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oops did not notice that, sorry

- '3.4'
- '3.5'
- '3.6'
# - 'pypy2.7-6.0'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

commented out?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since pypy is failing anyway, I've only kept pypy3 (previously it was only pypy).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fair enough

@nicoddemus nicoddemus merged commit a7847ed into pytest-dev:master Feb 14, 2019
@blueyed blueyed deleted the xenial branch February 14, 2019 18:12
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

2 participants