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 mlstacks compatibility check to CI #1767

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Sep 2, 2023

Conversation

strickvl
Copy link
Contributor

I added a check for the zenml release workflow which checks that the current package (editable install on the release branch) can be installed in the same environment as mlstacks.

Pre-requisites

Please ensure you have done the following:

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md document.
  • If my change requires a change to docs, I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • If I have added an integration, I have updated the integrations table and the corresponding website section.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • Other (add details above)

@strickvl strickvl added enhancement New feature or request internal To filter out internal PRs and issues dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file tests Test suite additions or updates labels Aug 28, 2023
@safoinme
Copy link
Contributor

How critically does zenml rely on mlstacks? Do we want this CI check just to inform us or actually it's a hard requirement before releasing

@strickvl
Copy link
Contributor Author

How critically does zenml rely on mlstacks? Do we want this CI check just to inform us or actually it's a hard requirement before releasing

That's a good question. If you can't install the two in the same environment then you can't use zenml stack deploy... etc, so I'd say if mlstacks is a core part of the ZenML flow / functionality then it should be a hard requirement.

But open to other opinions...

@strickvl strickvl requested review from stefannica and removed request for stefannica August 29, 2023 13:35
Copy link
Contributor

@avishniakov avishniakov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hm, I have a feeling that we better catch it earlier rather than on release... Here it is too late to make fixes, so why we not include this as part of regular CI as well?

@strickvl
Copy link
Contributor Author

strickvl commented Sep 1, 2023

@avishniakov yeah can do. It doesn't add much in terms of time. I'll update.

Copy link
Contributor

@fa9r fa9r left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Cool, great idea 🙌

@strickvl strickvl merged commit ffc634a into develop Sep 2, 2023
65 checks passed
@strickvl strickvl deleted the feature/OSS-2372-ci-compatibility-check branch September 2, 2023 16:27
avishniakov added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 4, 2023
* Add `bandit` to CI for security linting (#1775)

* ignore bandit false positives

* add timeout for requests call

* ignore bandit false positive

* ignore bandit false positives

* ignore bandit false positives

* update as per bandit suggestions

* add bandit as a dependency

* add security checks to lint-unit-test workflow

* add safety to dev dependencies + update version

* loosen safety dependency pin

* remove safety dependency

* Add `mlstacks` compatibility check to CI (#1767)

* add compatibility check to CI

* add compatibility check to earlier in CI

* remove dependency on integration tests from CI

* add compatibility check to earlier in CI

* remove compatibility check from integration tests

---------

Co-authored-by: Safoine El Khabich <34200873+safoinme@users.noreply.github.com>

* extend `StepContext` visibility to materializers (#1769)

* extend StepContext visibility to materializers

* skip output processing on failed step

* PR comments

* Revert GH changes to fix colima bug in macos gh (#1779)

* revert the changes done on gh in macos due to failing bug in colima

* revert the changes done on gh in macos due to failing bug in colima

* reinstall qemu

* Reduce CI runner count (#1777)

* combine setup with unit tests

* combine integration with template tests

* further reduce runner count

* remove dynamic uses

---------

Co-authored-by: Safoine El Khabich <34200873+safoinme@users.noreply.github.com>

* Add auto-population of E2E example from template (#1766)

* add checked-out template

* add setup to action

* auto-update e2e

* add OPT_IN_OUT_EMAIL

* pass email

* let e2e auto populate

* debug

* fix mkdir

* debug

* debug

* update commit command

* use ref_name

* update ref

* add ref to checkout

* Auto-update of template

* update template

* Auto-update of template

* restore full CI

* fix branch changes check

* debug

* restore full CI

---------

Co-authored-by: GitHub Actions <actions@github.com>

* fix step name in ci

---------

Co-authored-by: Alex Strick van Linschoten <strickvl@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Safoine El Khabich <34200873+safoinme@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: GitHub Actions <actions@github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file enhancement New feature or request internal To filter out internal PRs and issues tests Test suite additions or updates
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants