Add help for package authors #31
Conversation
| TAG_REQ = "\n".join(( | ||
| "Please make sure that:", | ||
| "- [ ] CI passes for supported Julia versions (if applicable).", | ||
| "- [ ] Version bounds are up to date." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this should probably be elaborated on a bit
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, this won't be totally clear to a newbie. Do you have anything we can link to?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not in one place yet, but I should really write up a package doc section on the subject.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That would be a huge boon as far as distributing the workload is concerned, I think. I suspect even many package authors aren't sure exactly what they should be doing here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll put that on my to-do list, hopefully right after rc2
| @@ -25,6 +25,12 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| SECRET = os.environ["SECRET"] | |||
|
|
|||
| TAG_REQ = "\n".join(( | |||
| "Please make sure that:", | |||
| "- [ ] CI passes for supported Julia versions (if applicable).", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
worth mentioning now that JuliaCIBot will run tests against the package and its reverse dependencies to see if breaking changes are going to cause problems
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like this isn't stable yet, right? Once it is we can hopefully just rely on that entirely for package tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's getting there pretty quickly. We should ask @nkottary to add a pending status indicator when the job gets triggered so we don't overlook it.
Both are useful to look at. JuliaCIBot isn't going to do well with packages that need custom setup, depend on non-default programs or libraries, etc. Those are usually easier to set up by a package author in their own .travis.yml and are likely non-trivial to replicate completely generally.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, I can add the pending status indicator for the package tests. Also, I'm going to show the reverse dependency results separately as a comment as that could take an arbitrary amount of time to complete.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we parallelize those across multiple workers?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is already running in parallel on a cluster but we currently don't have dynamic scaling capabillity.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the pending status is working nicely, thanks!
|
I like this. Would you like me to merge it now? |
|
Go for it, we can tweak as needed. |
Making it clear what we require for a merge, and that feedback on names etc is optional.