| =============================== |
| MEP19: Continuous Integration |
| =============================== |
|
|
| Status |
| ====== |
|
|
| **Completed** |
|
|
| Branches and Pull requests |
| ========================== |
|
|
| Abstract |
| ======== |
|
|
| matplotlib could benefit from better and more reliable continuous |
| integration, both for testing and building installers and |
| documentation. |
|
|
| Detailed description |
| ==================== |
|
|
| Current state-of-the-art |
| ------------------------ |
|
|
| **Testing** |
|
|
| matplotlib currently uses Travis-CI for automated tests. While |
| Travis-CI should be praised for how much it does as a free service, it |
| has a number of shortcomings: |
|
|
| - It often fails due to network timeouts when installing dependencies. |
|
|
| - It often fails for inexplicable reasons. |
|
|
| - build or test products can only be saved from build off of branches |
| on the main repo, not pull requests, so it is often difficult to |
| "post mortem" analyse what went wrong. This is particularly |
| frustrating when the failure cannot be subsequently reproduced |
| locally. |
|
|
| - It is not extremely fast. matplotlib's cpu and memory requirements |
| for testing are much higher than the average Python project. |
|
|
| - It only tests on Ubuntu Linux, and we have only minimal control over |
| the specifics of the platform. It can be upgraded at any time |
| outside of our control, causing unexpected delays at times that may |
| not be convenient in our release schedule. |
|
|
| On the plus side, Travis-CI's integration with github -- automatically |
| testing all pending pull requests -- is exceptional. |
|
|
| **Builds** |
|
|
| There is no centralized effort for automated binary builds for |
| matplotlib. However, the following disparate things are being done |
| [If the authors mentioned here could fill in detail, that would be |
| great!]: |
|
|
| - @sandrotosi: builds Debian packages |
|
|
| - @takluyver: Has automated Ubuntu builds on Launchpad |
|
|
| - @cgohlke: Makes Windows builds (don't know how automated that is) |
|
|
| - @r-owen: Makes OS-X builds (don't know how automated that is) |
|
|
| **Documentation** |
|
|
| Documentation of main is now built by travis and uploaded to https://matplotlib.org/devdocs/index.html |
|
|
| @NelleV, I believe, generates the docs automatically and posts them on |
| the web to chart MEP10 progress. |
|
|
| Peculiarities of matplotlib |
| --------------------------- |
|
|
| matplotlib has complex requirements that make testing and building |
| more taxing than many other Python projects. |
|
|
| - The CPU time to run the tests is quite high. It puts us beyond the |
| free accounts of many CI services (e.g. ShiningPanda) |
|
|
| - It has a large number of dependencies, and testing the full matrix |
| of all combinations is impractical. We need to be clever about what |
| space we test and guarantee to support. |
|
|
| Requirements |
| ------------ |
|
|
| This section outlines the requirements that we would like to have. |
|
|
| #. Testing all pull requests by hooking into the GitHub API, as |
| Travis-CI does |
|
|
| #. Testing on all major platforms: Linux, Mac OS-X, MS Windows (in |
| that order of priority, based on user survey) |
|
|
| #. Retain the last n days worth of build and test products, to aid in |
| post-mortem debugging. |
|
|
| #. Automated nightly binary builds, so that users can test the |
| bleeding edge without installing a complete compilation |
| environment. |
|
|
| #. Automated benchmarking. It would be nice to have a standard |
| benchmark suite (separate from the tests) whose performance could |
| be tracked over time, in different backends and platforms. While |
| this is separate from building and testing, ideally it would run on |
| the same infrastructure. |
|
|
| #. Automated nightly building and publishing of documentation (or as |
| part of testing, to ensure PRs don't introduce documentation bugs). |
| (This would not replace the static documentation for stable |
| releases as a default). |
|
|
| #. The test systems should be manageable by multiple developers, so |
| that no single person becomes a bottleneck. (Travis-CI's design |
| does this well -- storing build configuration in the git |
| repository, rather than elsewhere, is a very good design.) |
|
|
| #. Make it easy to test a large but sparse matrix of different |
| versions of matplotlib's dependencies. The matplotlib user survey |
| provides some good data as to where to focus our efforts: |
| https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jbK0J4cIkyBNncnS-gP7pINSliNy9lI-N4JHwxlNSXE/edit |
|
|
| #. Nice to have: A decentralized design so that those with more |
| obscure platforms can publish build results to a central dashboard. |
|
|
| Implementation |
| ============== |
|
|
| This part is yet-to-be-written. |
|
|
| However, ideally, the implementation would be a third-party service, |
| to avoid adding system administration to our already stretched time. |
| As we have some donated funds, this service may be a paid one if it |
| offers significant time-saving advantages over free offerings. |
|
|
| Backward compatibility |
| ====================== |
|
|
| Backward compatibility is not a major concern for this MEP. We will |
| replace current tools and procedures with something better and throw |
| out the old. |
|
|
| Alternatives |
| ============ |
|
|
|
|
| Hangout Notes |
| ============= |
|
|
| CI Infrastructure |
| ----------------- |
|
|
| - We like Travis and it will probably remain part of our arsenal in |
| any event. The reliability issues are being looked into. |
|
|
| - Enable Amazon S3 uploads of testing products on Travis. This will |
| help with post-mortem of failures (@mdboom is looking into this |
| now). |
|
|
| - We want Mac coverage. The best bet is probably to push Travis to |
| enable it for our project by paying them for a Pro account (since |
| they don't otherwise allow testing on both Linux and Mac). |
|
|
| - We want Windows coverage. Shining Panda is an option there. |
|
|
| - Investigate finding or building a tool that would collect and |
| synthesize test results from a number of sources and post it to |
| GitHub using the GitHub API. This may be of general use to the |
| Scipy community. |
|
|
| - For both Windows and Mac, we should document (or better yet, script) |
| the process of setting up the machine for a build, and how to build |
| binaries and installers. This may require getting information from |
| Russel Owen and Christoph Gohlke. This is a necessary step for |
| doing automated builds, but would also be valuable for a number of |
| other reasons. |
|
|
| The test framework itself |
| ------------------------- |
|
|
| - We should investigate ways to make it take less time |
|
|
| - Eliminating redundant tests, if possible |
|
|
| - General performance improvements to matplotlib will help |
|
|
| - We should be covering more things, particularly more backends |
|
|
| - We should have more unit tests, fewer integration tests, if possible |
|
|