[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.7 release delays

Ondřej Čertík ondrej.certik@gmail....
Wed Jun 27 01:57:51 CDT 2012


Hi Matthew,

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Fernando Perez <fperez.net@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Ondřej Čertík <ondrej.certik@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Do you use anything else besides Travis CI?
>>
>> Yes, we use both Shining Panda and Travis CI:
>>
>> https://jenkins.shiningpanda.com/ipython/
>> http://travis-ci.org/#!/ipython/ipython
>>
>> The SP setup is more complete, including Mac and Windows bots.
>>
>>> I donated money to them and they enabled pull request
>>> testing for SymPy and it's invaluable. We also use
>>> our custom sympy-bot (https://github.com/sympy/sympy-bot) to test pull
>>> request, but now
>>> when Travis can do that, we might just use that.
>>
>> We have a version of that: after Aaron Meurer gave us an invaluable
>> and detailed report on how you guys used it, Thomas Kluyver built for
>> us our new test_pr script:
>>
>> https://github.com/ipython/ipython/blob/master/tools/test_pr.py
>>
>> which we regularly use now in most PRs, e.g.:
>>
>> https://github.com/ipython/ipython/pull/2015#issuecomment-6566387
>>
>> It has proven to be *extremely* useful.
>>
>> This is some of the infrastructure that I hope we'll gradually start
>> using across all the projects (the topic of some of the threads in the
>> numfocus list).  In IPython, our ability to rapidly absorb code has
>> improved tremendously in part thanks to the smooth workflow these
>> tools give us; just in the month of June we've merged 116 PRs totaling
>> over 400 commits:
>>
>> (master)dreamweaver[ipython]> git log --oneline --since 2012-06-01 |
>> grep "Merge pull request" | wc -l
>> 116
>>
>> (master)dreamweaver[ipython]> git log --oneline --since 2012-06-01 | wc -l
>> 438
>>
>> There's no way to keep that pace unless we can really trust our
>> testing machinery to let us know what's safe by the time we get to
>> code review.
>>
>> As our tools mature, I really hope we'll start using them more across
>> different projects, because the benefit they provide is undeniable.
>
> We (nipy'ers) are heavy users of numpy and scipy.
>
> We use travis-ci for testing individual commits to personal repos:
>
> https://github.com/nipy/nibabel/blob/master/.travis.yml
>
> (using standard travis-ci python test machinery, multiple python versions)
>
> https://github.com/nipy/dipy/blob/master/.travis.yml
> https://github.com/nipy/nipy/blob/master/.travis.yml
>
> (using a hack to test against a system python, to avoid multiple
> compiles of numpy / scipy).  We've also been discussing numpy / scipy
> compiles on the Travis-CI mailing list :
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/travis-ci/uJgu35XKdmI/discussion.
>
> For the main repos we use buildbot and test on:
>
> Ubuntu Maverick 32-bit
> Debian sid 64-bit
> OSX 10.4 PPC
> OSX 10.5 Intel
> Debian wheezy PPC
> Debian squeeze ARM (a Raspberry PI no less)
> WIndows XP 32 bit
> SPARC (courtesy of our friends at NeuroDebian)
>
> http://nipy.bic.berkeley.edu/builders
>
> We've found several issues with numpy using these, and I've fed them
> back as I found them,
>
> http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/2076
> http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/2077
> http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/2174
>
> They are particularly useful for difficult to reproduce problems
> because they test often and leave a record that we can point to.  As
> I've said before, y'all are welcome to use these machines for numpy
> builds / tests.

This is amazing, thanks a lot for the email. I'll talk to you offlist.

Thanks,
Ondrej


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list