Skip to content

upstream-dev CI #19

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

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 17, 2020
Merged

upstream-dev CI #19

merged 5 commits into from
Jul 17, 2020

Conversation

keewis
Copy link
Collaborator

@keewis keewis commented Jul 14, 2020

This adds a upstream-dev CI.

@keewis keewis force-pushed the upstream-dev-ci branch from 713c893 to 06f7c62 Compare July 14, 2020 22:13
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 14, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #19 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master      #19   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.41%   82.41%           
=======================================
  Files           7        7           
  Lines         614      614           
=======================================
  Hits          506      506           
  Misses        108      108           

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 c14e2c1...628fbd8. Read the comment docs.

@keewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

keewis commented Jul 14, 2020

the CI seems to work, so this should be ready for review and merge. I'd especially take a look at the upstream-dev dependencies: should we add more, like the main indirect dependencies of xarray (pandas, mostly).

@jthielen
Copy link
Collaborator

Do we want to have this CI job be optional or not (i.e., should an upstream but unreleased break hold up PRs here until it is fixed)? Though, that may require it to be a separate check (which I'm not sure on what the status of separate checks is from #16).

@keewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

keewis commented Jul 14, 2020

we didn't activate the branch protection, so I'd say if the fix wouldn't take too long it's fine to merge with a failing upstream-dev CI. If it's not clear how to fix that (even upstream) we could just add conditional xfails.

The separate checks don't work yet (not even when copying xarray's configuration, so I guess either there's a setting we need to toggle or we need to ask support to do that for us – since we couldn't find that setting yet, I guess asking support is the way to go): if one pipeline fails the check also fails.

@keewis keewis changed the title WIP: upstream-dev CI upstream-dev CI Jul 15, 2020
@jthielen
Copy link
Collaborator

jthielen commented Jul 17, 2020

@keewis Sounds good. Hopefully the separate checks can get figured out at some point. I think then that this should be good to merge.

@keewis keewis merged commit 0c376dd into xarray-contrib:master Jul 17, 2020
@keewis keewis deleted the upstream-dev-ci branch July 17, 2020 16:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add upstream-dev CI
2 participants