Setup and test clean-up

astropy / saba

A Package which allows astropy to interface with sherpa

GNU General Public License v3.0

8 stars 9 forks source link

Setup and test clean-up #15

Closed bsipocz closed 7 years ago

bsipocz commented 7 years ago

This PR does a few cleanup steps:

removes astropy dev install hack
makes sure that the egg_info builds properly
bumps the version to 0.2.dev as v0.1 is out
remove the unused parts of setup.py and travis.yml
adds numpy as a dependency (though this is totally unnecessary as having astropy as dependency ensures that numpy is a dependency, too)

Tests are still failig, the reason is that a lot has happened in astropy dev compared to https://github.com/astropy/astropy/pull/5241, e.g more builds passes when that branch was specified: https://travis-ci.org/bsipocz/saba/builds/179460199

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage decreased (-0.6%) to 80.108% when pulling 00c6c2a9e6725c50d9d47501837bd4c9e7fce38c on bsipocz:setup_testing_cleanup into 044e847970d86c2b3c0a91f4410d8f550d23285c on astropy:master.

bsipocz commented 7 years ago

@nocturnalastro - This depends on the upstream astropy issue so please don't merge until that one is merged and I remove the workaround (atm it still has some real failures).

In the meantime I have two questions:

Is there a reason why you commented out the docs build on travis? If no particular reason, I'll add that back, too.
could you switch off the coveralls bot to post for PRs?

Also with this clean up PR we can cut back the CI time by ~50%, I'm sure @hamogu will appreciate that :)

nocturnalastro commented 7 years ago

@bsipocz - It's probably commented out because we didn't have sphinx docs when I started implementing this and then I forgot about it. And coveralls comments are now off.

bsipocz commented 7 years ago

I've removed the pointer to my astropy PR, so once that one is merge, travis needs to be restarted here and should pass.

bsipocz commented 7 years ago

Also, I wonder why the ipython code blocks were used instead of a normal python code blocks in the docs? Sure, it can be installed, but I think is totally unnecessary dependency.

nocturnalastro commented 7 years ago

I agree it's not needed.

bsipocz commented 7 years ago

Anyway, I leave it now, it can always be fixed at some point in the future.

bsipocz commented 7 years ago

closed & reopened to retrigger travis

nocturnalastro commented 7 years ago

@bsipocz thanks for all the improvements :) Are you happy for me to merge this?

bsipocz commented 7 years ago

yes, sure go ahead. Also if you have spare time to make a 0.1.1 release, this would probably solve the issues we saw for the conda packaging.

nocturnalastro commented 7 years ago

Sure I'll do it now :).

nocturnalastro commented 7 years ago

@bsipocz The new version should be up on pypi now :)

bsipocz commented 7 years ago

@nocturnalastro - It seems that the source code wasn't uploaded to pypi, there is only an empty entry for the new release: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/saba/0.1.1

nocturnalastro commented 7 years ago

@bsipocz it seems to have a problem with 0.1.1 so i put an "a" after and it uploaded fine.

nocturnalastro commented 7 years ago

@bsipocz The readthedocs build is failing. As astropy-helpers is missing. I've been playing around, adding astropy-helpers to pip-requirements both the one in docs and root. But the only thing which seems to fix the build is adding astropy-helpers back into .rtd-environment.yml Am I missing something?