Move release from travis to github actions by ssbarnea · Pull Request #360 · pytest-dev/pytest-html

ssbarnea · 2020-10-24T13:37:04Z

create packaging environment that produces deliverables
removes travis integration
configures github actions to call packaging after all the other
tests are passing and to make a release if tag is present
test.pypi.org is kept commented until we sort credentials for it
no credentials are needed as they are already configured in github
enables a daily cron run of CI, so we know if something goes wrong for external reasons

ssbarnea · 2020-10-24T14:14:38Z

@BeyondEvil @gnikonorov That is ready to ship!

BeyondEvil · 2020-10-24T14:23:25Z

I've started the review. But since the GHA is all new to me, it's going to take a while.

.github/workflows/actions.yml

gnikonorov

I did a quick skim now. Overall I think it looks good, I just had one question out of curiosity. I have to step away, but I'll do a proper review when I'm back.

.github/workflows/actions.yml

nicoddemus

Agree, overall looks good, I have the same questions regarding deleting tags though.

.github/workflows/actions.yml

gnikonorov

Since this will officially deprecate our usage of travis, can you remove any references to it as part of this commit or open an issue after this merges so we don't forget? I see the following references to it in the codebase:

$ git grep travis
README.rst:.. image:: https://img.shields.io/travis/pytest-dev/pytest-html.svg
README.rst:   :target: https://travis-ci.org/pytest-dev/pytest-html/
development.rst:All pull requests and merges are tested in `Travis CI <https://travis-ci.org/>`_
development.rst:based on the ``.travis.yml`` file.
development.rst:Usually, a link to your specific travis build appears in pull requests, but if
development.rst:`pull requests page <https://travis-ci.org/pytest-dev/pytest-html/pull_requests>`_
development.rst:8. Done. You can monitor the progress on `Travis <https://travis-ci.org/pytest-dev/pytest-html/>`_
$

ssbarnea · 2020-10-25T07:30:23Z

Since this will officially deprecate our usage of travis, can you remove any references to it as part of this commit or open an issue after this merges so we don't forget? I see the following references to it in the codebase:

$ git grep travis
README.rst:.. image:: https://img.shields.io/travis/pytest-dev/pytest-html.svg
README.rst:   :target: https://travis-ci.org/pytest-dev/pytest-html/
development.rst:All pull requests and merges are tested in `Travis CI <https://travis-ci.org/>`_
development.rst:based on the ``.travis.yml`` file.
development.rst:Usually, a link to your specific travis build appears in pull requests, but if
development.rst:`pull requests page <https://travis-ci.org/pytest-dev/pytest-html/pull_requests>`_
development.rst:8. Done. You can monitor the progress on `Travis <https://travis-ci.org/pytest-dev/pytest-html/>`_
$

Indeed, I forgot the cleanup travis references. I will update the PR.

webknjaz · 2020-10-25T10:17:44Z

.github/workflows/actions.yml

+      # - name: Publish to test.pypi.org
+      #   if: >-
+      #     (
+      #       github.event_name == 'push' &&


How about

Suggested change

# github.event_name == 'push' &&

# false &&

# github.event_name == 'push' &&

instead of commenting out the whole thing?

tox.ini

webknjaz · 2020-10-25T10:43:08Z

FTR these days I'd rely on https://github.blog/changelog/2020-07-06-github-actions-manual-triggers-with-workflow_dispatch/ instead of create because create requires post-checks in runtime and also runs on branch creation too.

gnikonorov

Thank you for cleaning up the docs! I have a few nitpicks, but don't mind approving after @webknjaz's feedback is addressed.

gnikonorov · 2020-10-25T14:38:59Z

development.rst

-All pull requests and merges are tested in `Travis CI <https://travis-ci.org/>`_
-based on the ``.travis.yml`` file.
+All pull requests and merges are tested in `GitHub Actions <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest-html/actions>`_
+which are defined inside ``.github`` folder.


nitpick: 'inside the .github folder.'

gnikonorov · 2020-10-25T14:39:59Z

development.rst

-The only way to trigger Travis CI to run again for a pull request, is to submit
-another change to the pull branch.
+To retrigger CI to run again for a pull request, you can use either use
+dropdown option, close and reopen pull-request or to just update the branch


nitpick: 'use the dropdown option, close and reopen the pull-request or just update the branch'

webknjaz · 2020-10-25T14:44:35Z

FWIW none of my feedback is blocking, it's rather informative.

gnikonorov · 2020-10-25T14:55:36Z

FWIW none of my feedback is blocking, it's rather informative.

Thank you for clarifying @webknjaz!

@ssbarnea let me know then when you've addressed all the feedback you wanted to and I'll approve. I'd like to wait for @BeyondEvil to also approve before we merge

nicoddemus · 2020-10-26T12:26:57Z

FTR these days I'd rely on github.blog/changelog/2020-07-06-github-actions-manual-triggers-with-workflow_dispatch instead of create because create requires post-checks in runtime and also runs on branch creation too.

I also think this would be nice, but just as @webknjaz, this not blocking for me. 😁

ssbarnea · 2020-10-26T17:53:00Z

I managed to setup testpypi and I will update this PR tomorrow.

gnikonorov · 2020-11-02T00:24:54Z

Hey @ssbarnea can we merge this in first, and then add testpypi in a follow up PR?

ssbarnea · 2020-11-02T08:55:07Z

I had to rebase, fixed additional commend. To avoid delaying this even more lets merge it as soon we get the review and we will do other improvements in follow-ups.

- create packaging environment that produces deliverables - removes travis integration - configures github actions to call packaging after all the other tests are passing and to make a release if tag is present - test.pypi.org is kept commented until we sort credentials for it - no credentials are needed as they are already configured in github

gnikonorov · 2020-11-02T14:22:10Z

I had to rebase, fixed additional commend. To avoid delaying this even more lets merge it as soon we get the review and we will do other improvements in follow-ups.

Of course @ssbarnea! I'll take a look today. Thank you

gnikonorov

LGTM!

As @ssbarnea mentioned we can get any improvements we need in subsequent PRs. I think this is fine as is and will let us start releasing with the new workflow.

I would like one more person to approve before merge, however. @BeyondEvil can you take a look as well?

BeyondEvil · 2020-11-10T15:25:27Z

.github/workflows/actions.yml

+      - name: Switch to using Python 3.6 by default
+        uses: actions/setup-python@v2
+        with:
+          python-version: 3.6


Is there a reason why we're using 3.6 and not a newer version @ssbarnea @gnikonorov ?

I'm pretty sure Sorin wanted to support the oldest possible version that the devs/contributors may use.

Yes, use of oldest supported is usually better than newest in order to avoid regressions. Based on experience using oldest proved to catch more issues than the newest, especially in this area.

Any CI failure that prevents a bad release is better than making a user unhappy. Note to myself: add comments on action tasks like this documenting their purpose.

Thanks @ssbarnea! Makes sense. 👍

ssbarnea requested a review from gnikonorov October 24, 2020 13:37

ssbarnea added skip-changelog Can be missed from the changelog. packaging Packaging category test This PR relates to tests, QA, CI. labels Oct 24, 2020

ssbarnea requested a review from BeyondEvil October 24, 2020 13:39

ssbarnea mentioned this pull request Oct 24, 2020

revive pytest-html maintenance #318

Open

ssbarnea force-pushed the rm/travis branch from 402d18e to 0c3e75c Compare October 24, 2020 13:53

ssbarnea requested a review from nicoddemus October 24, 2020 13:59

ssbarnea added Infrastructure Changes related to project infrastructure ( CI/CD, deploy mechanism, etc. ) and removed skip-changelog Can be missed from the changelog. labels Oct 24, 2020

gnikonorov reviewed Oct 24, 2020

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/actions.yml Show resolved Hide resolved

gnikonorov reviewed Oct 24, 2020

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/actions.yml Show resolved Hide resolved

nicoddemus reviewed Oct 24, 2020

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/actions.yml Show resolved Hide resolved

gnikonorov requested changes Oct 24, 2020

View reviewed changes

gnikonorov mentioned this pull request Oct 25, 2020

Clarifying the release schedule #355

Closed

ssbarnea force-pushed the rm/travis branch from 0c3e75c to 0ecbc41 Compare October 25, 2020 09:22

webknjaz reviewed Oct 25, 2020

View reviewed changes

tox.ini Show resolved Hide resolved

webknjaz reviewed Oct 25, 2020

View reviewed changes

tox.ini Show resolved Hide resolved

gnikonorov requested changes Oct 25, 2020

View reviewed changes

nicoddemus previously approved these changes Oct 26, 2020

View reviewed changes

gnikonorov mentioned this pull request Oct 28, 2020

Respect --show-capture=no flag #359

Merged

ssbarnea dismissed nicoddemus’s stale review via 6313926 November 2, 2020 08:40

ssbarnea force-pushed the rm/travis branch 2 times, most recently from 6313926 to dde51aa Compare November 2, 2020 08:43

ssbarnea requested review from gnikonorov, nicoddemus and webknjaz November 2, 2020 08:53

ssbarnea force-pushed the rm/travis branch from dde51aa to 45ac7e6 Compare November 2, 2020 08:57

gnikonorov approved these changes Nov 3, 2020

View reviewed changes

ssbarnea merged commit ca5ddbc into master Nov 3, 2020

BeyondEvil reviewed Nov 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

BeyondEvil deleted the rm/travis branch November 11, 2020 13:23

	# github.event_name == 'push' &&
	# false &&
	# github.event_name == 'push' &&

Conversation

ssbarnea commented Oct 24, 2020 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ssbarnea commented Oct 24, 2020

Uh oh!

BeyondEvil commented Oct 24, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gnikonorov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nicoddemus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gnikonorov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ssbarnea commented Oct 25, 2020

Uh oh!

webknjaz Oct 25, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

webknjaz commented Oct 25, 2020

Uh oh!

gnikonorov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gnikonorov Oct 25, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gnikonorov Oct 25, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

webknjaz commented Oct 25, 2020

Uh oh!

gnikonorov commented Oct 25, 2020

Uh oh!

nicoddemus commented Oct 26, 2020

Uh oh!

ssbarnea commented Oct 26, 2020

Uh oh!

gnikonorov commented Nov 2, 2020

Uh oh!

ssbarnea commented Nov 2, 2020

Uh oh!

gnikonorov commented Nov 2, 2020

Uh oh!

gnikonorov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BeyondEvil Nov 10, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

webknjaz Nov 10, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ssbarnea Nov 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BeyondEvil Nov 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

ssbarnea commented Oct 24, 2020 •

edited

Loading