search

CCI-MOC / hil

Hardware Isolation Layer, formerly Hardware as a Service
Apache License 2.0
24 stars 54 forks source link

Add Python 3 to the build matrix. #968

Closed zenhack closed 6 years ago

zenhack commented 6 years ago

There is predicatbly a failure, but I suspect it's something actually related to Python 3 now, so I'm submitting this as a pr.

Relates to: https://github.com/CCI-MOC/hil/issues/700

coveralls commented 6 years ago

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1685

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 1681: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 2097
Relevant Lines: 3534
💛 - Coveralls
xuhang57 commented 6 years ago

I might not know what I am talking about. But fwiw, normally, python 3 is using pip3 rather than pip2 to manage packages so does that mean we need to update that in travis for our python 3 build?

naved001 commented 6 years ago

Didn't make a difference when I was using pip3 vs pip for installing in my python3 virtualenv. it just couldn't import importlib._bootstrap in both cases (the current failure in our travis build).

naved001 commented 6 years ago

Also, in a virtualenv with python3 as default, pip seems to refer to pip3.

(.venv) naved:~/hil/.venv/bin$ python --version
Python 3.5.2
(.venv) naved:~/hil/.venv/bin$ pip --version
pip 9.0.1 from /home/naved/hil/.venv/lib/python3.5/site-packages (python 3.5)
(.venv) naved:~/hil/.venv/bin$ pip3 --version
pip 9.0.1 from /home/naved/hil/.venv/lib/python3.5/site-packages (python 3.5)
(.venv) naved:~/hil/.venv/bin$ pip2 --version
pip 9.0.1 from /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages (python 2.7)
xuhang57 commented 6 years ago

Is there a way to let travis to show all builds on this page?

xuhang57 commented 6 years ago

https://devguide.python.org/#status-of-python-branches

Given what it says in the official guide, we should start with 3.6 since 3.4 will be deprecated even before 2.7

zenhack commented 6 years ago

Quoting Lucas H. Xu (2018-03-05 16:38:23)

I know you are using 3.4 because 3.6 is failing. But since 3.4 is failing as well, should we just use 3.6?

We expect failures from any 3.x variant, but the 3.6 failures look like they're not even getting as far as installing python 3.6. I suspect the current failure is an actual portability bug, which is a bit better.

xuhang57 commented 6 years ago

@zenhack Thanks for explaining it. Should we install python 3.6 in the Travis container then?

My point is more like, instead of supporting 3.4 now, which it will be deprecated before 2020, we should look into 3.6 which we don't have to bother ourselves to do a version bump later since we are just about to set thing ups. Admittedly, I am not against using 3.4

zenhack commented 6 years ago

The 3.x series isn't terribly variable, and 3.4 takes less set-up now. By the time it's actually unsupported by the PSF, we can probably upgrade to another version in travis just by bumping the number in our config, whereas right now it's a (small) bit of work. If you want to do that work, I'm happy to accept a patch.

Quoting Lucas H. Xu (2018-03-05 17:15:37)

[1]@zenhack Thanks for explaining it. Should we install python 3.6 in the Travis container then?

My point is more like, instead of supporting 3.4 now, which it will be deprecated before 2020, we should look into 3.6 which we don't have to bother ourselves to do a version bump later since we are just about to set thing ups. Admittedly, I am not against using 3.4

-- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, [2]view it on GitHub, or [3]mute the thread.

Verweise

  1. https://github.com/zenhack
  2. https://github.com/CCI-MOC/hil/pull/968#issuecomment-370586779
  3. https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA18PpQPvTFM1xbmsVlGXuK72Ovfq9Ylks5tbbkJgaJpZM4SdSi9
xuhang57 commented 6 years ago

I suggest we could merge this and close the issue #700 . Maybe open a new issue that is about supporting python 3. Or we could just keep using the old issue.

Thanks Ian!