Conversation
|
Some observations:
|
|
@TTsangSC I've bumped the minimum versions of coverage / pytest-cov to prevent the failures, and I'm working on adding things back in so I can squash all these patches into a reasonable diff that will fix your PRs. Thanks for the analysis, it was very helpful. EDIT: Also noting, I want to add back in the removal of qemu given that we are running the CI's on arm naively. |
|
I'm thinking we just EOL Python 3.9 while we are at it, and just keep up with the non-EOL python versions. I'm also going to switch over to github trusted publishing to reduce long-lived secrets. |
| arch: auto | ||
| - python-version: '3.13' | ||
| install-extras: tests | ||
| os: ubuntu-latest |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi, sorry for the radio silence the last week or so, was working on stuff.
As of 714c414 we're still missing
- python-version: '3.13'
install-extras: tests
os: ubuntu-latest
arch: autoWhile the platform is already well-covered by the other test jobs, I think we should add this back for completeness, given that there is an equivalent job for windows-11-arm, macOS-latest, windows-latest, and ubuntu-24.04-arm.
| - ubuntu-24.04-arm | ||
| cibw_skip: | ||
| - '*-win32 cp3{9,10}-win_arm64 cp313-musllinux_i686' | ||
| - '*-win32 cp3{10}-win_arm64 cp313-musllinux_i686' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, cibuildwheel can't deal with braces without comma-separated options:
Warning: cibuildwheel: Invalid skip selector: 'cp3{10}-win_arm64'. This selector will have no effect.
We should probably either drop the skip or fix the label (-> cp310-win_arm64).
| # Or do we need these when building wheels for release, which may run on | ||
| # separate pipelines? | ||
| skip = ["*-win32", "cp3{9,10}-win_arm64", "cp313-musllinux_i686"] | ||
| skip = ["*-win32", "cp3{10}-win_arm64", "cp313-musllinux_i686"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ditto the comment for .github/workflows/tests.yml.
|
It's interesting that the pipelines for #430 went through without your first merging this... guess that GitHub got their stuff together and dialed back the rate limiting for the files that legacy |
|
Yeah, I was expecting the same error and was confused when I didn't see it. I'm wondering if rerunning the CI on your branches will give you a green status. I didn't see the normal way to do that. Either I can't do it for commits from other people or the CI run is too old to rerun. If you want to try you can push up a dummy commit, otherwise I hope to land this within the week. FWIW, one of the reasons I've been taking so long on this is because I wanted to get trusted publishing setup and improve the security posture a bit. This separates out all the secret related stuff into a release.yml that is different from the normal test.yml |
|
I guess it's just that my PRs have "gone stale" by GitHub's standard, pretty sure you have re-triggered pipelines on them before, which however stayed red because of the reasons this PR was addressing. Thanks for the update, I'll check if there are stray typos in the PRs and fix them, or just do dummy pushes otherwise. (There's also a big new feature PR coming... should be ready in half an hour. ;)) EDIT: time estimates were wrong, classic me. Anyway #431 is now online. |
|
@TTsangSC rebasing on main should fix your branches now. |
Bumping CI versions with xcookie to see if that avoids recent CI errors. This will drop 3.8 support, which is overdue anyway.
I think we may need to re-add the arm entries:
The wheel path detection logic changed, but I think that's ok. Would be nice if xcookie could keep the comments in the CI yaml. I was having issues getting ruamel.yaml doing that. I may manually update if I can solve the CI issues.