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

Add Travis CI scripts #4

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 9, 2017
Merged

Add Travis CI scripts #4

merged 3 commits into from
Jan 9, 2017

Conversation

mkoeppe
Copy link
Member

@mkoeppe mkoeppe commented Jan 1, 2017

Hi Nicolas,
I'd like to contribute Travis CI scripts for the sample project.
Included is also a fix for error signaling of "setup.py test".
Best wishes for the new year,
Matthias

@videlec
Copy link
Collaborator

videlec commented Jan 1, 2017

I think that it would be better to clone the base projects and add the travis CI scripts in this clone. The base is intended to be used by somebody without knowledge of anything and should remain as simple as possible.

However, I think that a list of optional stuff in the README that point toward other projects would be very good!

@nthiery
Copy link
Collaborator

nthiery commented Jan 2, 2017

Hi Matthias, and happy new year too!
I really like that feature, and am going to use it for my own packages!

Just a suggestion: using directly pip commands, rather than going through the Makefile (e.g. make install). The latter is really just meant as shorthand for the user. Some even argued that we should remove it, as it's a (small) deviation to Python's standard packaging.

No strong opinion on whether to integrate this feature directly into sage-sample, or have a forked repository. I see Vincent's point. The sage-sample repo should anyway be moved to the sagemath organization, and it could make sense to have a collection of repos sage-sample, sage-sample-with-travis, ...

Cheers,

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member Author

mkoeppe commented Jan 9, 2017

Sure, please feel free to use this in any way you think is best.
Thanks for providing this sample structure -- I'm now using the part for building Sphinx documentation in my own project.

@nthiery
Copy link
Collaborator

nthiery commented Jan 9, 2017

Hi @videlec : after a discussion with Luca and Erik about a cookie cutter for Sage (see #5), I would tend to just merge this feature, and worry later about how to make it optional. What do you think?

@videlec
Copy link
Collaborator

videlec commented Jan 9, 2017

cookie cutter would indeed be better than multiplying repositories!

@nthiery nthiery merged commit 9f1f6a8 into sagemath:master Jan 9, 2017
@nthiery
Copy link
Collaborator

nthiery commented Jan 9, 2017

Ok, I merge then. Thanks Matthias for the contribution, and glad to hear sage_sample was helpful!

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