Fix Travis-CI

[ocefpaf]

In order to investigate https://github.com/ioos/secoora/issues/225 I am coming back to pyoos a lot, so we need to get Travis-CI back online.

• pyoos builds on Python 3, but is far from py3k compliant. There is a significant amount of work to do. I am deleting the pyoos python3 binaries from the ioos channel.
• Some of the failures we are seeing are in the Python 2.7 are similar to what I am observing in my SECOORA notebooks. I will keep investigating what changed.

Ping @kwilcox, @rsignell-usgs, and @vembus.

[ocefpaf]

Fix #36

[ocefpaf]

The test_coops_describe_sensor failure (https://travis-ci.org/ioos/pyoos/jobs/91279614#L355) seems related to this: https://github.com/ioos/secoora/issues/225#issuecomment-155530971.

And maybe the test_coops_server_id (https://travis-ci.org/ioos/pyoos/jobs/91279614#L356) is related to this: https://github.com/ioos/secoora/issues/225#issuecomment-155540727

[ocefpaf]

I fixed all but Nerrs failures. @emiliom Are you familiar with Nerrs? Does your PR #48 address some of these issues?

See https://travis-ci.org/ioos/pyoos/jobs/91659664#L372-L378

[emiliom]

@ocefpaf, I'm very familiar with Nerrs -- that's why I submitted PR #48 two weeks ago! Are you a pyoos maintainer now?? Thanks for following up. FYI, I'm using my pyoos NERRS fork updates (that are in this PR) operationally on an application, pulling data every hour or so.

Unfortunately I can't follow up right now b/c I'm still in meetings. I have a hunch as to what could be causing failures in automatic tests, but I don't have time right now to follow up. Maybe Wednesday evening ...

[daf]

I'm happy to merge this without it fully passing and addressing NERRS separately, @ocefpaf .

[ocefpaf]

Are you a pyoos maintainer now??

Nope. Just part of the cleaning crew.

Maybe Wednesday evening

No problem. Maybe we can merge this as is (@kwilcox or @daf ?). Later on and you can rebase your branch to see if the NERRS tests passes or not.

[daf]

Sounds good!

[ocefpaf]

Thanks @daf you were faster than I :wink:

[kwilcox]

NERRS tests probably fail because the code assumes they allow your IP address to access their service. Emilio's PR addresses this by adding the token based auth. Someone will need to get a token from NERRS to use in testing.

[emiliom]

@kwilcox:

NERRS tests probably fail because the code assumes they allow your IP address to access their service.

That was exactly my hunch.

Emilio's PR addresses this by adding the token based auth. Someone will need to get a token from NERRS to use in testing.

I have a token, but I don't feel at liberty to place it in a publicly visible location. FYI, that access option was developed by NERRS/CDMO last year partly through my nudging. Last time I asked them (last year), they were not comfortable opening it up for wider use. I/we should ask/encourage them again ...

[emiliom]

@ocefpaf:

Maybe we can merge this as is (@kwilcox or @daf ?). Later on and you can rebase your branch to see if the NERRS tests passes or not.

Looks like it's merged already, right? Cool! I can rebase on my end next week. But the testing will still be tricky, b/c of the issue @kwilcox mentioned, and b/c I'm reluctant to place my auth token in a publicly visible location w/o NERRS/CDMO's blessing.

[ocefpaf]

Maybe we should add a known failure or skip flag to those tests. @kwilcox thoughts?

[kwilcox]

@emiliom Since you have connections with the CDMO group already, would you mind contacting them and asking for a token to be used in testing only (very limited usage). We can encrypt it into the .travis.yml to prevent abuse.

Other than that... we need someone who is wiling to port pyoos to py3!

[emiliom]

@emiliom Since you have connections with the CDMO group already, would you mind contacting them and asking for a token to be used in testing only (very limited usage).

Will do.

We can encrypt it into the .travis.yml to prevent abuse.

Ah, excellent! That will address the concern.

Other than that... we need someone who is wiling to port pyoos to py3!

Heh. Not me. First I have to start using py3 ...

[ocefpaf]

Other than that... we need someone who is wiling to port pyoos to py3!

See #52

[lukecampbell]

:+1: