-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 233
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
WORK-IN-PROGRESS - contributing isoscope scheduler #1126
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
805cef6
to
e34c299
Compare
…dist. Not tested yet.
69fdbee
to
0c95b78
Compare
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Hi @vitaly-krugl thanks for the PR! Although this PR has very high quality, to be honest I'm hesitant of accepting this PR, because it is somewhat complex and pytest-xdist does not have much maintenance bandwidth and it adds to that. But this is my opinion only, @RonnyPfannschmidt @bluetech what do you think? Also consider that this might be published as a separate plugin, it does not need to be included in pytest-xdist: the package would implement |
first i want to recognize the effort and creativity that went into this pr, those few thousand lines are conceptually very dense, and currently come without additional tests, we have a very bad match up here for the maintenance situation - the new contributed code is without tests and of necessarily high complexity most volunteer managed opensource projects are unable to take in such a contribution easily, in particular if it comes in without any deep prior engagement/discussion with the maintainer team if the goal is to make this quickly available, then i strongly recommend publishing this as a "plugin" to xdist, if the goal is to land this in xdist, then its likely to take a long time, as the contribution size and complexity of the solved problem is immense i agree that the code itself is high quality, but the high complexity of the solved problem, the sheer size of this contribution, the need for tests to be written and our own awareness of our very limited maintenance capabilities its going to be a while before im in a place to give it the due diligence it needs, and i suspect this will be a problem for the initial contribution i also suspect that multi host aware architecture of the coordinator will look different than initially imagined my current recommendation would be to begin this as own pypi package, adding a own testsuite and to coordinate with xdist to ensure xdist changes dont break it in addition if this is not a direct part of xdist, its more easy to declare multi host testing not being supported in the feature and engage as we eventually enable to pull this in i absolutely want to enable coordinated fixture/resource creation/destruction |
WORK-IN-PROGRESS - READY FOR PREVIEW;
Implementation of the Distributed Scope Isolation scheduler for pytest-xdist.
Properties of this scheduler:
Thanks for submitting a PR, your contribution is really appreciated!
Here's a quick checklist that should be present in PRs:
Make sure to include reasonable tests for your change if necessary
We use towncrier for changelog management, so please add a news file into the
changelog
folder following these guidelines:Name it
$issue_id.$type
for example588.bugfix
;If you don't have an issue_id change it to the PR id after creating it
Ensure type is one of
removal
,feature
,bugfix
,vendor
,doc
ortrivial
Make sure to use full sentences with correct case and punctuation, for example: