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

Python 3.6 support #2512

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Python 3.6 support #2512

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

Peque
Copy link
Contributor

@Peque Peque commented Jul 26, 2019

Will take a look at Python 3.7 once this gets merged.

@Peque Peque changed the title WIP: Python 3.6 support Python 3.6 support Jul 27, 2019
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Sep 9, 2019

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.2%) to 88.273% when pulling 514d8c5 on Peque:python36 into b0b20b0 on quantopian:master.

@Peque
Copy link
Contributor Author

Peque commented Sep 9, 2019

@richafrank @ssanderson Friendly ping. 😇

@Peque Peque mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2019
@suitablyquantified
Copy link

suitablyquantified commented Oct 6, 2019

This only fails because the retarded CI build process takes more than an hour.

@suitablyquantified
Copy link

bump @richafrank @ssanderson

@ssanderson
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @Peque sorry for the (very) long response delay here. I've opened a general issue on some of the goals and challenges we've had around adding support for newer Python versions here: #2616.

It looks like the status on this PR is that the Travis build is working (!), but that Appveyor was timing out. Any idea on what was causing the timeouts?

@Peque
Copy link
Contributor Author

Peque commented Jan 14, 2020

@ssanderson Thanks for your reply.

In my experience, AppVeyor is not-very-fast (compared to Travis), at least the free workers allocated to FOSS projects. That, plus the not-very-fast test suite in Zipline is what may be causing the timeouts.

@Peque
Copy link
Contributor Author

Peque commented Jan 14, 2020

@ssanderson Probably just clicking on "rerun" will make the tests pass in AppVeyor too.

@ssanderson
Copy link
Contributor

Hmm. I clicked rerun and it seems like the appveyor build still died with a timeout after an hour. If I'm reading the build log in https://ci.appveyor.com/project/Quantopian/zipline/builds/30111660/job/ub9twt0bed0688wm?fullLog=true correctly, it looks like we're not even making it through the install, let alone running the tests.

@ssanderson
Copy link
Contributor

For comparison, a recent appveyor build on another branch just took about 19 minutes, so it seems like something's meaningfully different about the changes here.

@Peque
Copy link
Contributor Author

Peque commented Jan 14, 2020

@ssanderson I'll have a quick look at it tomorrow.

While testing examples, positions are not in the expected order.
@Peque Peque force-pushed the python36 branch 2 times, most recently from 191e839 to 13d3e80 Compare January 16, 2020 12:22
@Peque
Copy link
Contributor Author

Peque commented Jan 16, 2020

@ssanderson My conclusion is: AppVeyor is selectively slow. 😂

Would you mind merging these commits into a branch in your own fork and open a new PR to see if AppVeyor finishes when you open the PR instead of me?

See #2619.

@Peque
Copy link
Contributor Author

Peque commented Jan 21, 2020

@ssanderson Friendly ping. 😊

@ssanderson
Copy link
Contributor

hey @Peque. @richafrank and I looked at this for a bit this morning and couldn't see anything obvious that would cause your Appveyor builds to run slower than other ones. There have also been other builds from non-Q contributors that have succeeded in the interim (e.g., #2430), so I don't have a good working theory here yet.

@Peque
Copy link
Contributor Author

Peque commented Jan 21, 2020

@ssanderson Have you tried fetching this branch from your fork and opening a PR from your account? Just out of curiosity. Maybe those other non-Q contributors had paying AppVeyor accounts too. 🤷‍♀️

@dmichalowicz dmichalowicz mentioned this pull request Feb 4, 2020
@Peque
Copy link
Contributor Author

Peque commented Feb 5, 2020

Closing this after: #2643

@Peque Peque closed this Feb 5, 2020
@Peque Peque deleted the python36 branch February 5, 2020 13:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants