-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
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
Replace travis with GitHub for running CI jobs #166
Conversation
BTW, the Github workflows can even be used to automate the package release process, e.g. for every tag build wheel upload it to pypi.org and create a release on Github from the CHANGELOG. |
Thanks, this is great! I agree with removing Python 3.5 support, but you should reflect this in
I think uploading the package manually isn't a lot of work, but why not reduce the amount of work even more! How would the PyPI authorization work? Anyway, I think this should happen in a separate PR. |
.github/workflows/test.yml
Outdated
push: | ||
branches: [ master ] | ||
pull_request: | ||
branches: [ master ] |
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.
Why is this explicitly limited to master
?
Won't all (or at least most) PRs be from master
?
I don't really have experience with non-master
PRs, but I don't see a reason why to prohibit them. Is there?
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.
I think it stems from me trying to limit CI jobs, as for example in private repos you can have only some hundereds each month.
But you are right, we can maybe completely remove the limit here.
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.
I removed all limitations and the CI jobs should now be executed for every push / pull request.
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.
Now it will run all CI jobs twice for pull requests, one time for the push event, one time for the pull request. This might be not necessary, or would you prefer it this way?
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.
If you know a way to avoid the duplication, that would be great. But I think both things individually are very useful.
I removed it from
If you have a lot of packages to maintain and different users that should be able to create releases it is helpful. If you only do a release once a month/year, it's indeed not really needed.
Yes. |
Yes, but who's secrets? I forgot, but we actually have one: https://pypi.org/user/spatialaudio/ Would we generate a secret from this account? |
Sounds reasonable. I'm not sure if you can see at https://pypi.org/project/sfs/0.6.0/ who did the actual publishing. Otherwise a private account would also work. |
I don't know. I didn't see any indication on the web page ...
What do you mean by private account? |
Should have set personal PyPI account instead of private. For example at audeering we use the credentials of my PyPI account. |
OK, thanks. |
Since some time we can now run CI jobs directly with Github. I like that solution as you don't need to use an external service.
I would propose to switch our tests to Github as well.
In addition, this proposes to remove support for Python 3.5, which would bring the following benefits for writing the code:
f'{variable} in strings'
/cc @mgeier