Start testing Python 3.8 on Travis

[sethmlarson]

I also noticed we didn't have the 3.7 identifier within setup.py so I went ahead and added that.

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #1475 into master will decrease coverage by 25.7%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1475       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   94.75%   69.05%   -25.71%     
===========================================
  Files          22       22               
  Lines        1946     2682      +736     
===========================================
+ Hits         1844     1852        +8     
- Misses        102      830      +728

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/urllib3/contrib/socks.py	35.83% <0%> (-64.17%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/util/__init__.py	50% <0%> (-50%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/connection.py	55.73% <0%> (-44.27%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/contrib/_appengine_environ.py	58.82% <0%> (-41.18%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/request.py	58.92% <0%> (-41.08%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/connectionpool.py	62.46% <0%> (-37.54%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/util/timeout.py	66.66% <0%> (-33.34%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/util/ssl_.py	45.02% <0%> (-32.22%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/util/response.py	68.57% <0%> (-31.43%)	⬇️
src/urllib3/util/retry.py	71.19% <0%> (-28.81%)	⬇️
... and 9 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d0255e0...954b454. Read the comment docs.

[pquentin]

Yeah, the 3.7 identifier was added as part of #1417 but for some reason the tests never passed.

[pquentin]

I meant #1413, sorry

[sethmlarson]

Looks like 3 failures on Xenial about FQDN name being dotted. Wonder what's causing those failures. :)
Also looks like the oclint is only there sometimes? Going to make that little hacky workaround conditional.

[sethmlarson]

Well would you look at that, looks like Travis' Xenial environment has problems resolving localhost. as a FQDN whereas Trusty, macOS and AppVeyor have no issue with it. Found this via: https://travis-ci.org/urllib3/urllib3/jobs/455794642

[theacodes]

Interesting... What can we do to get around that?

…

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 6:34 PM Seth M. Larson ***@***.***> wrote: Well would you look at that, looks like Travis' Xenial environment has problems resolving localhost. as a FQDN whereas Trusty, macOS and AppVeyor have no issue with it. Found this via: https://travis-ci.org/urllib3/urllib3/jobs/455794642 — You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1475 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAPUc6jVhiLs6tiWcxpjBIFFOlJaO4kvks5uviQ6gaJpZM4YkbiV> .

[sethmlarson]

cat every configuration file on Travis one commit at a time. ;) We'll see what I can dig up.

[sethmlarson]

Well there's no localhost entry within /etc/hosts on Travis Xenial:

cat /etc/hosts
## Managed by Chef on packer-5be09923-4562-38a8-19bd-301565dfe65a.c.eco-emissary-99515.internal :heart_eyes_cat:
## cookbook:: travis_build_environment
##     file:: templates/default/etc/cloud/templates/hosts.tmpl.erb
127.0.1.1 travis-job-28eaec74-68c6-4ef1-a0a0-653331f1d5d8 travis-job-28eaec74-68c6-4ef1-a0a0-653331f1d5d8 ip4-loopback xenial64

I wonder if we can add valid entries and refresh we can get it to be happy?

[pquentin]

The surprising thing is that I think there's no localhost entry on 14.04 either but the tests work there?

[sethmlarson]

Per comments in this thread: https://travis-ci.community/t/xenial-unable-to-resolve-localhost-as-a-valid-fqdn/919 it's to do with the differences between GCE and AWS.

[pquentin]

What's your plan here? Disable those tests on Linux? Maybe we can even detect GCE and use xfail in that case?

[sethmlarson]

I was planning on using xfail when we detect "gce" from TRAVIS_INFRA.

[sethmlarson]

That looks like it worked, I'm gonna say this is the way to go for us. These tests are being done elsewhere and I'd hope there's no difference with FQDN resolution between Python 3.7 and 3.8.

[pquentin]

Looks good to me! Great work here, @SethMichaelLarson!

Looks like you need to restart the Appveyor build. And don't forget to squash 😄

[sethmlarson]

Unfortunately no way to restart singular builds on AppVeyor for me. :( Will have to run them all again and cross those fingers! 🤞

[hugovk]

For next time, here's a new thing to restart failed builds on AppVeyor:

https://twitter.com/appveyor/status/1065468890128408576