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

Add selective testing #764

Merged
merged 21 commits into from
Mar 9, 2021
Merged

Add selective testing #764

merged 21 commits into from
Mar 9, 2021

Conversation

billingsley-john
Copy link

@billingsley-john billingsley-john commented Mar 4, 2021

Proposed changes

PR which adds matrix testing to GitHub Actions to allow testing with different versions of CadQuery, depending on the branch merging.

Pull Requests to Develop - Test just using CQ2.1
Pull Requests to Main - Test using both CQ2.1 and CQ master

Also adds 'if' statement to run_tests.sh script which uses the include-neutronics true/false value to specify which tests should run in each case. This works as intended, however, true/false has not be included in the matrix testing as some non-neutronics scrips still have neutronics dependencies, causing some non-neutronics tests to fail when using the dockerfile built without the neutronics dependencies. This will be addressed in a future PR.

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to the Paramak?
Put an x in the boxes that apply

  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Code refactoring
  • Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)
  • New tests

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before merging your code.

  • Pep8 applied
  • Unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate)

Further comments

If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 4, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #764 (02387e0) into develop (cf27ff1) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #764   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    95.38%   95.38%           
========================================
  Files           72       72           
  Lines         4724     4724           
========================================
  Hits          4506     4506           
  Misses         218      218           

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update cf27ff1...02387e0. Read the comment docs.

@billingsley-john
Copy link
Author

billingsley-john commented Mar 5, 2021

GitHub Actions only support one workflow per yml file. Two yml files are required to have separate workflows for PRs to main and develop.

@billingsley-john billingsley-john mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2021
10 tasks
@billingsley-john
Copy link
Author

This is also ready for review @shimwell . What do you think of this?

@shimwell
Copy link
Collaborator

shimwell commented Mar 9, 2021

This is also ready for review @shimwell . What do you think of this?

Looks like a clever solution, congrats on that you found a nice approach. I see this can also do include neutronics=False at some point as well which could be handy

@shimwell
Copy link
Collaborator

shimwell commented Mar 9, 2021

Looks great, feel free to merge if ready

@billingsley-john
Copy link
Author

billingsley-john commented Mar 9, 2021

This is also ready for review @shimwell . What do you think of this?

Looks like a clever solution, congrats on that you found a nice approach. I see this can also do include neutronics=False at some point as well which could be handy

Yes, that would be great to add. I've tried to outline the current problem with doing this in #777, but this can be looked into next

@billingsley-john billingsley-john merged commit 3521d02 into develop Mar 9, 2021
@billingsley-john billingsley-john deleted the add_selective_testing branch March 12, 2021 09:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants