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

Pip for ci #605

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Sep 8, 2023
Merged

Pip for ci #605

merged 12 commits into from
Sep 8, 2023

Conversation

cisaacstern
Copy link
Member

Towards #604

This PR tries just using pip for testing, with goal of:

  • simplifying workflow files
  • speeding up test runtimes
  • making testing install more closely reflect users' installs

@cisaacstern
Copy link
Member Author

cisaacstern commented Sep 8, 2023

This seems like an overall win to me and an important, albeit incremental, improvement in test runtime. Specifically I view this as a:

  • Big improvement in intelligibility and maintainability of the test workflow. This is a lot simpler. Among other things, the number of checks per commit is reduced by half (because each check previously had a prepare-env step which is now removed), which is big win for readability of the checks results which were getting quite cluttered.
  • Big improvement in degree to which our test environment replicates users pip installed environments. This PR surfaced two big discoveries in that realm: (1) We had not specified apache-beam as a dependency 😱 ; and (2) GRIB pipelines should run in conda environments (due to the dependency on cfgrib), but other than that, everything here works from pip.
  • Incremental improvement in test run time. My anecdotal comparison to checks run times on some other open PRs is that we might save about 1 minute of the ~11-15 minute test running time. That's not nothing, but bigger improvements will probably come with reducing fixture redundancy.

The simplification and user environment replication alone is worth it here, IMO, and the marginal speed up is a nice add-on. Before merging noting a few future directions for follow-on work:

  • Restore GRIB testing with a separate requires-conda test setup somewhere
  • Catching issues like Workaround broken conda release of beam 2.50.0 #603 is nice, so we should generally try to test against conda environments somewhere, but maybe on conda-forge/pangeo-forge-recipes-feedstock?
  • It's good to have the upstream-dev testing (and we should probably include Zarr-python there) but it's a big heavy to run on every commit. Maybe we can move that to nightly runs on a chron schedule?

Edit: Moved these points ☝️ to #606

@cisaacstern cisaacstern merged commit 7ee35fc into main Sep 8, 2023
@cisaacstern cisaacstern deleted the pip-for-ci branch September 8, 2023 05:02
@cisaacstern cisaacstern mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2023
3 tasks
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.

1 participant