[Numpy-discussion] Re: Cirrus testing
On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 5:01 AM Andrew Nelson wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 10:51, Andrew Nelson wrote: > >> There's a scipy issue on this that discusses how to reduce usage, >> https://github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/19006. >> >> Main points: >> >> - at the moment CI is run on PR and on Merge. Convert to only running on >> PR commits. I've just submitted a PR to do this for numpy. >> > Thanks! We shouldn't be running any CI on merge commits, other than for building and deploying new versions of the docs to https://numpy.org/devdocs/. > - add a manual trigger. Simple to achieve, but requires input from a >> maintainer. >> > I'd like to avoid that, things that require more actions from maintainers tend to be counterproductive. > - reduce wheel build frequency. At the moment I believe they're made every >> week. However, that decision has to factor in the increased frequency that >> may be desired as numpy2.0 is worked on. >> > We're doing the x86-64 wheel builds in GHA daily now, which is necessary. The aarch64/arm64 ones can be done less frequently, but once a week seems good at least in the run-up to 2.0. > Also, it's significantly more expensive to test on macOS M1 compared to > linux_aarch64. The latter isn't tested on cirrus. However, you could use > linux_aarch64 as a proxy for general ARM testing, and only run macOS when > necessary. > That sounds like a good idea to me. Or at least checking linux_aarch64 first. I like how you configured that for SciPy. Also, now that we're on the topic of CI: I opened https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/24410 for a larger overhaul of our GitHub Actions jobs. I put that on the agenda for today's community meeting, but folks interested in CI may also want to comment on that issue. Cheers, Ralf ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com
[Numpy-discussion] Re: Cirrus testing
With regards to scheduling wheel builds (and this may already be completely obvious), but numpy should consider a scheduled build time that comes reasonably before scipy's scheduled build time so that there is a quicker turn-around time with possible breaking changes. If you schedule the numpy wheel builds to be after scipy's, then it could be a whole week before you'd find out about any breakages. Cheers! Ben Root On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 7:12 AM Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 5:01 AM Andrew Nelson wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 10:51, Andrew Nelson wrote: >> >>> There's a scipy issue on this that discusses how to reduce usage, >>> https://github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/19006. >>> >>> Main points: >>> >>> - at the moment CI is run on PR and on Merge. Convert to only running on >>> PR commits. I've just submitted a PR to do this for numpy. >>> >> > Thanks! We shouldn't be running any CI on merge commits, other than for > building and deploying new versions of the docs to > https://numpy.org/devdocs/. > > >> - add a manual trigger. Simple to achieve, but requires input from a >>> maintainer. >>> >> > I'd like to avoid that, things that require more actions from maintainers > tend to be counterproductive. > > >> - reduce wheel build frequency. At the moment I believe they're made >>> every week. However, that decision has to factor in the increased frequency >>> that may be desired as numpy2.0 is worked on. >>> >> > We're doing the x86-64 wheel builds in GHA daily now, which is necessary. > The aarch64/arm64 ones can be done less frequently, but once a week seems > good at least in the run-up to 2.0. > > >> Also, it's significantly more expensive to test on macOS M1 compared to >> linux_aarch64. The latter isn't tested on cirrus. However, you could use >> linux_aarch64 as a proxy for general ARM testing, and only run macOS when >> necessary. >> > > That sounds like a good idea to me. Or at least checking linux_aarch64 > first. I like how you configured that for SciPy. > > Also, now that we're on the topic of CI: I opened > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/24410 for a larger overhaul of our > GitHub Actions jobs. I put that on the agenda for today's community > meeting, but folks interested in CI may also want to comment on that issue. > > Cheers, > Ralf > > ___ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ > Member address: ben.v.r...@gmail.com > ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com
[Numpy-discussion] Re: Cirrus testing
On Wed, Aug 16, 2023, 23:48 Benjamin Root wrote: > With regards to scheduling wheel builds (and this may already be > completely obvious), but numpy should consider a scheduled build time that > comes reasonably before scipy's scheduled build time so that there is a > quicker turn-around time with possible breaking changes. If you schedule > the numpy wheel builds to be after scipy's, then it could be a whole week > before you'd find out about any breakages. > Scipy upped its frequency to daily in the run up to numpy2 > ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com
