XSF Discussion - 2019-08-30

is it a concern that Python 3.3 builds are failing on xmpp.org CI?

yes

they are the syntax check for the JSON files

I recently learnt that one can put descriptive labels on travis jobs

we should do that ;)

Alex, so check the build logs, they (should) explain what’s wrong

if it’s not clear to you, send me a link to the failed build and I’ll look into it

Just commented on the ticket.

Apparently, Travis can not / no longer download 3.3.

Which is also ancient.

(2012)

jonas’: its this PR: https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/604

Maybe we should run this job with 3.7 instead.

oh dear

yeah

or 3.6 or something

3.7 was tricky with travis, too

Alex: since this change doesn't actually touch the files being linted with Python 3, I think you can just merge.

ralphm, sure? I think the member list is linted

jonas’: really? 3.7.0 was released over a year ago

ah it’s not

ralphm, yes, but something about their infrastructure

you need to change more than just the python version

Well, it didn't help that they canned a bunch of people after the acquisition.

jonas’: shall I have a go?

jonas’: meanwhile, you agree Alex can merge?

yes, go for a merge

When I did https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/595 I didn’t encounter any visible issue, all tests passed.

usually I do not merge my own PRs, but happy to do so ;-)

done

(Y)

linkmauve: could be it is not failing all the time

https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/605

let’s see how that goes

jonas’: why not PR 595?

because I didn’t click the link

Python 3.6 was last released in December

it’s obviously better

yay

although a smoke test that it actually still runs the tests would be good

(which I’ll do in a sec)

I triggered a rebuild: https://travis-ci.org/xsf/xmpp.org/builds/564874726

And 3.7 succeeds

Let's merge it.

wait

only merge it if this build fails: https://travis-ci.org/xsf/xmpp.org/jobs/578703384

I assumed you would merge anyway :-D

but yay, it fails