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

fix: lazy doc test and add unstable feature tests to CI #418

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 16, 2021

Conversation

austinabell
Copy link
Contributor

I noticed just after #409 was pulled in that the doc test was not updated for the change from collections to store, sorry!

Wasn't caught because the unstable feature flag was not updated to be enabled on the CI, so I added that as well.

@@ -27,4 +27,4 @@ jobs:
- name: Add wasm32 target
run: rustup target add wasm32-unknown-unknown
- name: Test
run: cargo test --all
run: cargo test --all --features unstable
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's add a separate step for this or add an &&, to make sure we don't break code without the feature.

And, while we are at it, s/all/workspace, --all is deprecated.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, so the reason I didn't was that the unstable feature is purely additive and the CI is already very time-consuming. @mikedotexe have any thoughts here?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, so the reason I didn't was that the unstable feature is purely additive

This is exactly the thing which is good to verify on CI. But I agree that this is not critical.

CI is already very time-consuming.

Oh wow, 20min for CI for the project of this scale does seem outrageous. rust-analyzer's CI takes 7ish minutes (example), so there's probably a room for improvement here

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah my gut is to have a separate step as well, although CI that would add even more time. I know with Travis we could add automated weekly/monthly checks, perhaps we could do this and have our team get alerts. Thoughts, @austinabell ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah my gut is to have a separate step as well, although CI that would add even more time. I know with Travis we could add automated weekly/monthly checks, perhaps we could do this and have our team get alerts. Thoughts, @austinabell ?

Can do intervals with actions as well, although this seems like a stop-gap solution I'm happy to add that check if you guys agree that's a good temporary solution.

@austinabell
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can we pull this in for now and improve the CI later? tests are currently failing with this feature enabled

@matklad
Copy link
Contributor

matklad commented Jun 10, 2021

Yeah, it always makes sense to prioritize CI improvements over CI cleanups!

@mikedotexe mikedotexe merged commit 8524281 into master Jun 16, 2021
@mikedotexe mikedotexe deleted the austin/fix_doc_test branch June 16, 2021 21:57
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.

3 participants