Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Update uv.lock + CI tweaks + fix pymatgen issue #6676
Update uv.lock + CI tweaks + fix pymatgen issue #6676
Changes from all commits
b28f5a1
475cedb
148142a
79398fb
c054b5c
33152f9
0394eb1
a456400
86938af
79c81a7
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Previously we were not respecting the
inputs.extras
when using the lockfile. Now we do (at the expense of very ugly Github Actions syntax :-( )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 it is inspired from JavaScript so at least not completely random.
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.
in CI willinputs.extras
inuv sync --locked ${{ inputs.extras && format('--extra {0}', inputs.extras) || '' }}
always betrue
? Because if it is not pass as input it will set to "pre-commit" as default, no? Then this clause can be simplified.Never mind, I see extra='' below.
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.
Since now
setup-uv
action activates the virtual environment automatically, we no longer need to install into system python.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.
The updated setup-uv action now activates the virtual environment automatically.
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.
This issue is described in detail in #6676 (comment).
I'll remove the workaround hopefully soon in a subsequent PR.
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.
This appears now because with the changes in the
install-aiida-core
we install all extras? Isn't this failure something we should fix later on?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.
So there are two things here:
extras
parameter when using the lock, I think it is better to use the lockfile. You're right that this change here is not necessary, it just makes things more consistent, since now all jobs in ci-code.yml use the lockfile.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.
Ah sorry for being not clear. I am fine with the changes, just would like to know if we should make an issue and fix it in some later PR
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 this is minor enough that it could go in here, but let me know if you disagree.
I can open an issue about converting more CI jobs to use the lockfile though.
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 mean that
verdi devel check-undesired-imports
fails when tui is installed sounds undesirable and sounds like this should be fixed likeonly check for asyncio if tui is not installed
. I am not sure why this happensThere 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.
Aaah, now I see what you mean. Sorry, I misunderstood your original comment.
Yeah, I'll open an issue for that.
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.
Opened #6691 to follow up on this
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.
Why this has to be added in this PR? I just don't see anything related to it. Is it just to ensure that colors are used for visuals? I am asking because I remember that some tests rely on the color and fail when playing with these options but I don't remember the details anymore.
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.
This is just an unrelated improvement to add colors to pytest output in GitHub UI.
I am not aware of any tests that would depend on colors, and we're already using this option in many other workflows (e.g. ci-code) so I think this is a safe change.
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.
There was something that failed in #6434 when I enforced colors but I cannot check it because the CI result already removed it. But when the test pass it should be okay!
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.
The
--check
option is a new alias for--locked
which is more intuitive.