-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.3k
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
CI: correct azure-36-locale slow name + move pyarrow #30065
CI: correct azure-36-locale slow name + move pyarrow #30065
Conversation
is the test failure in the py37_locale build one of the things this PR is intended to address? |
I didn't change anything about the 37 build (only 36), so no ;) |
I quickly "fixed" CI (-> #30069), will look into it tomorrow properly |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The renaming makes sense. I saw that before, was part of #29685.
For me the way the tests are specified is still too complex to understand. So I don't really know what makes sense regarding the changes in versions. But if you know what you're doing, I'm happy with this, and hopefully we revisit all those dependency files for #29685 soon.
To be clear, I explicitly don't know what I am doing ;) Because there is no guideline or docs or rationale on what is the purpose of which build or what is supposed to be tested in which build. But, basically I didn't change anything in this PR (except for the pyarrow stuff), I just fixed the naming to be logical. The main thing I was wondering is that maybe the names weren't wrong in the first places, but we were accidentally using the wrong file in the posix.yml, and maybe I should only have changed it there (which would actually change which packages are used in the slow test build). |
For the actual issue I was trying to solve: I checked that in the Linux py36_locale build pyarrow 0.12 is installed, and the parquet tests are actually run (not listed in the skipped ones), so now it is working as intended. |
I was referring to unpinning all the packages. I think the renaming is the best we can do so far, at least the names match what's being tested. |
To be clear, in case you are talking about this PR: I am trying to explain I didn't do any of that. The "big diff" is just because git/github couldn't handle the rename |
ah, I see, didn't get that. All good then. |
OK, merging then! |
Follow-up on #30039
I put it in the wrong file, because the file names were swapped...
Now, here, I just renamed both files to the other name (the diff apparently cannot the rename, therefore you see a lot of changes, but I can ensure I didn't change anything except for pyarrow).
But, I could also leave the files as is and switch them in the posix.yml file ? (use the envs for the different build)
I don't know if there was something specific in either environment that was specifically added for the slow tests?
cc @datapythonista