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

Infrastructure (installating, testing, etc.) #2

Merged
merged 20 commits into from
May 8, 2017
Merged

Conversation

jgosmann
Copy link
Collaborator

@jgosmann jgosmann commented Apr 12, 2017

Motivation and context:

This adds the files required to install nengo_spa, run the tests with py.test and tox, adds configuration for Travis-CI, AppVeyor, and CodeCov, etc.

I adjusted the examples to not fail the tests, but at a later point I have to go through and update the explanations and coding style for nengo_spa.

Most of the code in this PR has been copied from Nengo.

In contrast to Nengo I moved the examples into the nengo_spa directory to be able to install them as package data. The install location is somewhat obscure anyways, so that I don't expect most users to discover it. So installing them as package data which might end up in a zip/egg files should not matter to them. I leave it to a separate PR (#7) to add a script to extract these to a user defined location. (This is what setuptools suggests.).

Some tests needed some adjustments to the tolerances to make them robust to different seeds.

Interactions with other PRs:
none

How has this been tested?
Running tests on continuous integration platforms.

How long should this take to review?

  • Average (neither quick nor lengthy) (most things are copied from Nengo with slight adjustments)

Where should a reviewer start?

It might not be necessary to check the changes to the examples very carefully as those have to be overhauled in a separate PR anyways. The current changes are just the minimal changeset to make them pass the tests (i.e. not raise any exceptions).

Types of changes:

  • Non-code change (touches things like tests, documentation, build scripts)

Checklist:

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING.rst document.
  • [n/a] I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • [n/a] I have included a changelog entry.
  • [n/a] I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

Still to do:

  • coverage
  • readme, long description in setup.py
  • test running
    • with py.test
    • with tox
    • with Travis-CI
    • with appveyor
    • examples
  • setup.cfg
  • manifest for packaging
  • requirements files
  • changelog
  • documentation build

@jgosmann jgosmann added this to the 0.1 release milestone Apr 12, 2017
@jgosmann jgosmann self-assigned this Apr 12, 2017
@jgosmann jgosmann force-pushed the infrastructure branch 4 times, most recently from 797fe85 to fc9cd23 Compare May 5, 2017 22:26
jgosmann added 7 commits May 5, 2017 18:27
Basic code structure has been copied from Nengo.
Only test current Numpy and oldest supported Numpy, but test across different
Nengo versions.
The location of the examples is not easily discoverable by the user, so
it does not hurt much if they are hidden in a zip/egg file. At a later
point a script should be added to extract them (and documentation) to a
user specified location.

I fixed the examples to pass the test, but at a later point I have still
to go through all of them and make sure they adhere to the new nengo_spa
syntax and all the descriptions make sense.
@jgosmann jgosmann removed their assignment May 7, 2017
@jgosmann
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jgosmann commented May 7, 2017

This should be ready for review, I updated the PR description. Potentially, @tbekolay is better suited to review this PR than @tcstewar as it does not involve SPA specific things, but mainly sets up build service configuration files etc.

Copy link
Collaborator

@Seanny123 Seanny123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This LGTM. I've created and reviewed stuff using .pylintrc and .travis.yml so I feel pretty confident in this assessment. I went through a tutorial about MANIFEST.in to understand it, so I'm slightly confident about it's approval as well. The rest of the changes appear to be pretty trivial.

@jgosmann jgosmann merged commit ad17ed5 into master May 8, 2017
@jgosmann jgosmann deleted the infrastructure branch May 8, 2017 18:13
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