- 
                Notifications
    You must be signed in to change notification settings 
- Fork 297
drop py36 support #4163
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
drop py36 support #4163
Changes from all commits
c6e90c9
              8150691
              d13f203
              410a534
              8a81860
              40f447c
              File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | 
|---|---|---|
|  | @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ | |
| PACKAGE = str("lib" / Path("iris")) | ||
|  | ||
| #: Cirrus-CI environment variable hook. | ||
| PY_VER = os.environ.get("PY_VER", ["3.6", "3.7", "3.8"]) | ||
| PY_VER = os.environ.get("PY_VER", ["3.7", "3.8"]) | ||
| There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Could /should this use the same discovery code that you've written for the docs? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. What we're actually testing in nox is not a specific version of python, but a specific environment that is defined by a yaml file in  There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Hmmm I'll give it a try and see what it looks like... the hardest part is deciding on where such common code will live. But yeah, that would be a nice win 👍 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @bjlittle I'm happy for this to go in as-is with your latest updates. Let me know if you plan to rework otherwise I'm merging today There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @jamesp Okay, so I gave this a reasonably punt... but you swiftly run into a bit of a pickle as everything under the  It is possible, and I suspect we'd either want to re-structure our resources or use  There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm surprised this is an issue. Sure, we run our tests on a installed instance of Iris, so there are concerns on inclusion/exclusion there. But as far as I was aware Nox was expected to operate on a checkout of a repo, rather than within an install. Indeed I've based a few things on this assumption. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I mean, you must be referencing  This isn't a big issue, happy to leave it hard coded. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Just to be clear... the issue isn't about whether the directory exists, per se... rather that I was attempting to bank common code under  The simple alternative is to put common code within  So it's do-able, just whatever you prefer... if you want to follow-thru with this There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Either way, I don't think this should be a blocker for this PR. We can happily bank this PR "as is", and iterate on this later. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Also, for me this is all becoming a bit of a moot point, as a developer still requires to manually update the  | ||
|  | ||
| #: Default cartopy cache directory. | ||
| CARTOPY_CACHE_DIR = os.environ.get("HOME") / Path(".local/share/cartopy") | ||
|  | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm concerned that we got this error before you made the change:
Doesn't this mean behaviour has changed? Why?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll see if I can replicate this locally...
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay, so frustratingly I can't recreate this failure locally. Either with a test environment that I resolve myself from the
py37dependencies, nor with thepy37lock...I'm not overly concerned about this... although, I'm not loving this inconsistency in behavour. It could be down to a
nosetest race condition... dunno.That said, I'd be more worried if the warning wasn't being generated.
So, personally, I'm not seeing this as a blocker to merging unless you guys want to pursue it further.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I’ve seen this elsewhere, and it went away when tests were re-spun.