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

CI macOS: Build following stages even when some job failed; adjust platforms #36711

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 14, 2023

Conversation

mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

@mkoeppe mkoeppe commented Nov 12, 2023

To fix what can be seen in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/actions/runs/6827163283 - stage-2 was not attempted because some of the stage-1 jobs failed.

We also replace one of the failing platforms and remove another.

📝 Checklist

  • The title is concise, informative, and self-explanatory.
  • The description explains in detail what this PR is about.
  • I have linked a relevant issue or discussion.
  • I have created tests covering the changes.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.

⌛ Dependencies

Matthias Koeppe added 2 commits November 12, 2023 20:11
…tandard by -minimal, to avoid problem with maxima
@mkoeppe mkoeppe changed the title CI macOS: Build following stages even when some job failed CI macOS: Build following stages even when some job failed; adjust platforms Nov 13, 2023
@mkoeppe mkoeppe requested a review from jhpalmieri November 13, 2023 04:13
@mkoeppe mkoeppe added this to the sage-10.2 milestone Nov 13, 2023
Copy link

Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit a933ae2; changes) is ready! 🎉

@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

jhpalmieri commented Nov 13, 2023

What are stages 1 and 2? I have a guess about stage-2-optional-p-z or stage-2-experimental-0-o, for example, but what are stage-1 and stage-2? In particular, if stage-1 fails, why should stage-2 be able to succeed?

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Nov 13, 2023

Stage 1 builds non-Python packages, stage 2 builds Python packages

@@ -40,30 +40,35 @@ jobs:
with:
stage: "2"
needs: [stage-1]
if: ${{ success() || failure() }}
Copy link
Member

@jhpalmieri jhpalmieri Nov 13, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this equivalent to if: ${{ always() }}? (I found that at https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-jobs/using-jobs-in-a-workflow#example-not-requiring-successful-dependent-jobs.) Any reason to prefer one approach to the other?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We just got rid of a lot of always() in:

@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

Okay, looks good.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Nov 13, 2023

Thanks!

Setting it to blocker so it gets merged in the next rc

@vbraun vbraun merged commit 705a0ee into sagemath:develop Nov 14, 2023
22 checks passed
vbraun pushed a commit to vbraun/sage that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2023
<!-- ^^^^^
Please provide a concise, informative and self-explanatory title.
Don't put issue numbers in there, do this in the PR body below.
For example, instead of "Fixes sagemath#1234" use "Introduce new method to
calculate 1+1"
-->
<!-- Describe your changes here in detail -->

sagemath#36711 introduced a syntax error that causes failures:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/actions/runs/6870325982

Fixed here - as seen in
https://github.com/mkoeppe/sage/actions/runs/6874334555

<!-- Why is this change required? What problem does it solve? -->
<!-- If this PR resolves an open issue, please link to it here. For
example "Fixes sagemath#12345". -->
<!-- If your change requires a documentation PR, please link it
appropriately. -->

### 📝 Checklist

<!-- Put an `x` in all the boxes that apply. -->
<!-- If your change requires a documentation PR, please link it
appropriately -->
<!-- If you're unsure about any of these, don't hesitate to ask. We're
here to help! -->
<!-- Feel free to remove irrelevant items. -->

- [x] The title is concise, informative, and self-explanatory.
- [x] The description explains in detail what this PR is about.
- [ ] I have linked a relevant issue or discussion.
- [ ] I have created tests covering the changes.
- [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly.

### ⌛ Dependencies

<!-- List all open PRs that this PR logically depends on
- sagemath#12345: short description why this is a dependency
- sagemath#34567: ...
-->

<!-- If you're unsure about any of these, don't hesitate to ask. We're
here to help! -->

URL: sagemath#36723
Reported by: Matthias Köppe
Reviewer(s): John H. Palmieri
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants