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

CompatHelper: bump compat for ClusterManagers to 1, (keep existing compat) #20

Merged

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2025

This pull request changes the compat entry for the ClusterManagers package from 0.4.6 to 0.4.6, 1.
This keeps the compat entries for earlier versions.

Note: I have not tested your package with this new compat entry.
It is your responsibility to make sure that your package tests pass before you merge this pull request.

@oschulz oschulz force-pushed the compathelper/new_version/2025-02-04-00-13-37-450-01681657914 branch from ed9a6f9 to ece33b4 Compare February 4, 2025 00:13
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 4, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 66.77%. Comparing base (d76832e) to head (ece33b4).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #20      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.06%   66.77%   -0.29%     
==========================================
  Files          21       20       -1     
  Lines        1515     1514       -1     
==========================================
- Hits         1016     1011       -5     
- Misses        499      503       +4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@fhagemann
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like this can be merge without any issue, it only affects LSFManagers which do not seem to be used in ParallelProcessingTools: JuliaParallel/ClusterManagers.jl@v0.4.9...v1.0.0

@oschulz
Copy link
Owner

oschulz commented Feb 17, 2025

Yes, I'd like to look into the test failures though.

@fhagemann
Copy link
Contributor

fhagemann commented Feb 19, 2025

Seems to me like it's a bug in the existing code, but not related to this PR:

ThreadPinning.pinthreads(ParallelProcessingTools.AutoThreadPinning) = nothing

should be

ThreadPinning.pinthreads(::ParallelProcessingTools.AutoThreadPinning) = nothing

--> #21

@oschulz oschulz merged commit 69eddb0 into main Feb 19, 2025
9 of 12 checks passed
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