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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

option to disable parallel spinner for CI envs #1184

Closed
gaborbernat opened this issue Mar 11, 2019 · 5 comments 路 Fixed by #1311
Closed

option to disable parallel spinner for CI envs #1184

gaborbernat opened this issue Mar 11, 2019 · 5 comments 路 Fixed by #1311

Comments

@gaborbernat
Copy link
Member

@gaborbernat gaborbernat commented Mar 11, 2019

In some cases (CIs mostly) it makes sense to not pollute the output with the progress bar, let's allow somehow to disable it in such rare cases 馃憤 #1142 An environment variable will suffice.

@webknjaz
Copy link
Contributor

@webknjaz webknjaz commented Mar 28, 2019

N.B. Place in code: https://github.com/tox-dev/tox/pull/1102/files#diff-fa162e4b845a9c35e2b680c199480dc6R634

GitHub
This solution is subprocess based. We're already heavily using subprocesses, so I consider this implementation safe. TBD:

for non-live parallel show some progress notification,
correctly forwa...

@ssbarnea
Copy link
Member

@ssbarnea ssbarnea commented Mar 28, 2019

@gaborbernat Can you pleaseedi the bug description to make it easier to read? A link to another issue does not help much.

PS. I cannot edit it myself.

@gaborbernat
Copy link
Member Author

@gaborbernat gaborbernat commented Mar 28, 2019

@ssbarnea addressed

@ssbarnea
Copy link
Member

@ssbarnea ssbarnea commented Mar 28, 2019

Thanks. Indeed the progress-bar (or keep-alive) may find useful to indicate to ci or humans that the task is not stuck. At the same time it could only be seen as a source of spam for both ci (where it can create undesired extra logs) or for users, where it can set the modified flags in the terminal windows, without real reasons (I seen this with iterm tabs too).

Being able to tune it is highly desired.

@rpkilby
Copy link
Member

@rpkilby rpkilby commented Apr 23, 2019

Maybe something similar to unittest's dot output per test case? However, we'd have to iterate on something else. e.g., maybe output a dot every second or so when a subprocess has written to stdout?

This should reduce spam, while still enabling keep-alive.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants