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 Travis job against the new resolver #7884

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Apr 2, 2020

Conversation

uranusjr
Copy link
Member

@uranusjr uranusjr commented Mar 23, 2020

Switched from Travis as recommended by @pradyunsg. I am not very familiar with Azure Pipeline so let’s see if this works…

Switching back to Travis because Azure is unable to do what we want (see comment below)

@uranusjr uranusjr added the skip news Does not need a NEWS file entry (eg: trivial changes) label Mar 23, 2020
@uranusjr uranusjr force-pushed the new-resolver-ci branch 5 times, most recently from e249ef3 to 4a2f5d7 Compare March 23, 2020 06:33
@uranusjr
Copy link
Member Author

uranusjr commented Mar 23, 2020

Err, it seems like Azure Pipeline does not have an equivalent to Travis’s allow_failures. Back to Travis… 😥

microsoft/azure-pipelines-tasks#9302

@uranusjr uranusjr changed the title Add Azure Pipeline job against the new resolver Add Travis job against the new resolver Mar 23, 2020
@uranusjr
Copy link
Member Author

All tests are passing. This is not right.

@uranusjr
Copy link
Member Author

Yay, got it failing. Now I need to figure out a way to set allow_failures.

Copy link
Member

@pradyunsg pradyunsg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not 100% sure, but try this?

I can experiment with this easily on https://github.com/github-actions-playground/friends-pradyunsg, if you'd like me to pick it up from here. :)

.travis.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.travis.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@uranusjr uranusjr marked this pull request as ready for review March 23, 2020 13:48
@uranusjr uranusjr closed this Mar 23, 2020
@uranusjr uranusjr reopened this Mar 23, 2020
Co-Authored-By: Pradyun Gedam <[email protected]>
@uranusjr
Copy link
Member Author

🦶

@uranusjr uranusjr requested a review from pradyunsg March 25, 2020 17:51
@uranusjr
Copy link
Member Author

uranusjr commented Apr 2, 2020

Bump 💪

Copy link
Member

@pradyunsg pradyunsg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Sorry about the delay here!

@pfmoore pfmoore merged commit c88fa39 into pypa:master Apr 2, 2020
@uranusjr uranusjr deleted the new-resolver-ci branch April 2, 2020 14:04
@lock lock bot added the auto-locked Outdated issues that have been locked by automation label May 5, 2020
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 5, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
auto-locked Outdated issues that have been locked by automation skip news Does not need a NEWS file entry (eg: trivial changes)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants