Skip to content
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

Test Python 3.13 regularly on Ubuntu and macOS on CI #1990

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 5, 2025

Conversation

EliahKagan
Copy link
Contributor

This enables testing Python 3.13 in the main CI test workflow for Ubuntu and macOS, as discussed in comments in #1989, but not Windows yet (pending #1955).

I think it makes sense to test these on CI, because:

  • They're working now, and if they stop working, we would want to know.
  • While Python 3.13 shouldn't be added as a classifier in setup.py yet since it's not fully working on Windows, testing other platforms on CI makes it easier for users to know they are meant (and believed) to work.
  • The Ubuntu and macOS job are fast, so this probably isn't adding too much load, delay, energy usage, etc.

@Byron
Copy link
Member

Byron commented Jan 5, 2025

Thanks a lot!

@EliahKagan
Copy link
Contributor Author

No problem! It looks like this may have been meant to be merged. If so, auto-merge is still waiting on a review. (After it is merged, I'll rebase #1955 again.)

@Byron Byron merged commit 405b029 into gitpython-developers:main Jan 5, 2025
24 checks passed
@Byron
Copy link
Member

Byron commented Jan 5, 2025

Thanks for the reminder! Apparently merges only happen after approval. However, I noticed that once approved, they can be merged even while CI is running. Probably because main isn't protected.

@EliahKagan EliahKagan deleted the py313-unix branch January 7, 2025 04:09
@EliahKagan
Copy link
Contributor Author

It sounds like protecting main may be the way to go, so that approvals can be made either before or after CI finishes, without risk of inadvertently merging something that fails the tests. Is there any reason not to do that? Are there any changes to the workflows themselves that should be made to go along with or support it?

@Byron
Copy link
Member

Byron commented Jan 7, 2025

I took at look and it seems like main is already protected, and as requirement for merging, an approval is set. What's also enabled is the need for checks to pass, but thanks to the worst UX, the checkbox does nothing. Instead, one has to pick each and every job individually, without a way to pick all at once.

This is where it stopped, again, and it's kind of where the famous auto-merge tends to stop for me 😅.

@EliahKagan
Copy link
Contributor Author

If I understand correctly, this is more manageable in gitoxide due to GitoxideLabs/gitoxide@943350a (GitoxideLabs/gitoxide#1551), plus the refinement in GitoxideLabs/gitoxide@4e672ef (GitoxideLabs/gitoxide#1668). Sometime soon, I can look into making a PR here with something like that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants