Reset runtest for components in a bundle#3775
Conversation
|
@boegelbot please test @ jsc-zen3 |
|
@ocaisa: Request for testing this PR well received on jsczen3l1.int.jsc-zen3.fz-juelich.de PR test command '
Test results coming soon (I hope)... Details- notification for comment with ID 2972323554 processed Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me, |
|
Test report by @boegelbot Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
|
I don't think this is the right solution. PythonPackage has a default of So I think if you set this to The problem IMO is (only?) I think it might be better to remove the entry if present so components use their easyblock specific defaults. In general it makes me wonder if this is the correct approach: Why would we reset/change a single property but not any other? What makes Consider for example a Maybe we should rather only copy specific entries from the parent config and let |
|
I don't think what you're saying is exactly correct, this doesn't change the default values of the parent easyblock, it changes what is inherited by the components. The default value for runtest is None, as set in framework. All this does is restore that default, the easyblock used by the components can still override that, as can also be done by |
|
If you want to make a new easyblock that sets a default value for I think that it's unintuitive to have all the extra options of the parent easyblock passed to the component easyblock, but that's what is currently there. Fixing the issue with running tests for components just exposed that it can be problematic. |
IIRC on construction of an easyblock instance from an easyconfig it will only take the defaults if the easyconfig doesn't specify a value. But now you do specify a value:
You mean that it now needs to use
Fully agreed. |
|
I could check it's value and explicitly log that I'm doing the reset, with advice about how to work around it? |
Oh, you might be right about that, I should actually check. If removing it instead has the desired effect I'm fine with that. I am just afraid that that may also have unintended consequences. |
Should be easy to check. And I guess there aren't many easyblocks changing the default so the (remaining) impact (of the now run test step) should be low.
Might still be a good idea. How many Bundle-inherited easyblocks do we have changing the default of |
|
Test report by @boegel Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 2 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in total) |
… overridden by the easyblock
…easyblocks into default_runtest_bundle
|
@Flamefire I've updated this a bit and tested it with some print statements when setting the This works as much as I think it should. It still allows the component easyblock to make default changes to the value of |
|
@boegelbot please test @ jsc-zen3 |
|
@ocaisa: Request for testing this PR well received on jsczen3l1.int.jsc-zen3.fz-juelich.de PR test command '
Test results coming soon (I hope)... Details- notification for comment with ID 2976731242 processed Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me, |
|
Test report by @boegelbot Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
|
@boegelbot please test @ jsc-zen3 |
Ok, should work well enough. |
|
@ocaisa: Request for testing this PR well received on jsczen3l1.int.jsc-zen3.fz-juelich.de PR test command '
Test results coming soon (I hope)... Details- notification for comment with ID 2976783869 processed Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me, |
Co-authored-by: Alexander Grund <Flamefire@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@boegelbot please test @ jsc-zen3 |
|
@ocaisa: Request for testing this PR well received on jsczen3l1.int.jsc-zen3.fz-juelich.de PR test command '
Test results coming soon (I hope)... Details- notification for comment with ID 2976837810 processed Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me, |
|
Test report by @boegelbot Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
|
Test report by @boegelbot Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 4 out of 4 (3 easyconfigs in total) |
Follow up to #3748 for the case where it is have been shown to be problematic (components in a Pythonbundle)