BLD: updated conda recipe to be conda-bld 3plus compliant #18592

bobhaffner · 2017-12-01T14:36:11Z

closes Update conda recipe for new conda #18002
tests added / passed
passes git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff
whatsnew entry

I did local testing of the build. Assuming the CI will catch any errors?

jreback

lgtm. so we don't actually test this on the ci directly. would be nice to tackle that as well (we would hijack a specific build, like we do for BUILD_TEST, where we use pip to build), and use this recipe to build it directly.

jreback · 2017-12-01T14:43:47Z

conda.recipe/meta.yaml

@@ -14,14 +14,14 @@ requirements:
  build:
    - python
    - cython
-    - numpy x.x
+    - numpy
    - setuptools
    - pytz


we can remove pytz/python-dateutil from the build step

bobhaffner · 2017-12-01T15:21:15Z

@jreback Sounds like a plan. I'll check out BUILD_TEST. Separate PR?

jreback · 2017-12-01T15:32:14Z

@bobhaffner ~~separate PR is fine.~~

actually, can you add to this PR?

bobhaffner · 2017-12-01T16:06:22Z

@jreback No problem. I'll check it out later today

codecov · 2017-12-01T18:56:34Z

Codecov Report

Merging #18592 into master will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #18592      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.44%   91.43%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         157      157              
  Lines       51379    51379              
==========================================
- Hits        46985    46978       -7     
- Misses       4394     4401       +7

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	`89.3% <ø> (ø)`	⬆️
#single	`40.57% <ø> (-0.11%)`	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/io/gbq.py	`25% <0%> (-58.34%)`	⬇️
pandas/core/frame.py	`97.81% <0%> (-0.1%)`	⬇️
pandas/util/testing.py	`81.8% <0%> (+0.19%)`	⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d74ac70...dcdf988. Read the comment docs.

codecov · 2017-12-01T18:57:13Z

Codecov Report

Merging #18592 into master will decrease coverage by 0.16%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #18592      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.59%   91.43%   -0.17%     
==========================================
  Files         153      157       +4     
  Lines       51361    51379      +18     
==========================================
- Hits        47046    46978      -68     
- Misses       4315     4401      +86

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	`89.3% <ø> (-0.16%)`	⬇️
#single	`40.57% <ø> (-0.17%)`	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/tseries/converter.py	`0% <0%> (-100%)`	⬇️
pandas/io/excel.py	`80.39% <0%> (-9.74%)`	⬇️
pandas/io/json/table_schema.py	`95.83% <0%> (-1.39%)`	⬇️
pandas/plotting/_converter.py	`65.25% <0%> (-1.27%)`	⬇️
pandas/core/reshape/melt.py	`96.22% <0%> (-1.03%)`	⬇️
pandas/core/indexes/interval.py	`93.05% <0%> (-0.75%)`	⬇️
pandas/util/testing.py	`81.8% <0%> (-0.74%)`	⬇️
pandas/compat/__init__.py	`58.18% <0%> (-0.59%)`	⬇️
pandas/io/json/json.py	`91.75% <0%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
pandas/core/indexes/category.py	`97.2% <0%> (-0.31%)`	⬇️
... and 38 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 99d384d...d0c77a6. Read the comment docs.

bobhaffner · 2017-12-03T00:27:14Z

I'm having a little trouble figuring out how to tackle this BUILD_TEST.

I'm thinking about adding a piece at line 170 of install_travis.sh to remove the pip build after it's complete and then proceed with the conda recipe build. Not sure though, my CI experience is limited. Eager to learn it though. Any advice would be appreciated.

jreback · 2017-12-03T01:12:38Z

don’t remove the existing code rather we can add this for say CONDA_BUILD_TEST

would repurpose one of the other allowed failure builds just change the name of that build (eg ci/requirements needs changes as well as .travis.yml)

bobhaffner · 2017-12-03T21:21:07Z

Thanks for the reply, @jreback

So add a CONDA_BUILD_TEST to the .travis.yml and create the following?

requirements-3.6_CONDA_BUILD_TEST.build
requirements-3.6_CONDA_BUILD_TEST.pip
requirements-3.6_CONDA_BUILD_TEST.sh

I intend to leave the .pip and the .build empty and do the conda build ./conda.recipe/ --numpy 1.11 --python 3.6 -q in the .sh file.

jreback · 2017-12-03T21:25:51Z

don’t create new, repurpose the 3.5 build: https://travis-ci.org/pandas-dev/pandas/jobs/310085793

jreback · 2017-12-10T18:38:00Z

ci/requirements-3.6_CONDA_BUILD_TEST.run

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+


this file not needed

jreback · 2017-12-10T18:38:35Z

doc/source/whatsnew/v0.22.0.txt

@@ -330,4 +330,5 @@ Other
 ^^^^^

 - Improved error message when attempting to use a Python keyword as an identifier in a ``numexpr`` backed query (:issue:`18221`)
-
+- Updated conda recipe to be in compliance with conda-build 3.0+ (:issue:`18002`)


I think we now have a section on building changes; don't need the whatsnew about ci

bobhaffner · 2017-12-10T18:52:55Z

Thanks for the feedback, @jreback

jreback · 2017-12-11T11:34:40Z

ci/requirements-3.6_CONDA_BUILD_TEST.sh

+
+conda install conda-build
+
+conda build ./conda.recipe/ --numpy 1.11 --python 3.6 -q


rather than the actual build line here, but this in install_travis_script; call this BUILD_TEST_CONDA (rather than BUILD_TEST) so you can disambiguate, rename the other to BUILD_TEST_PIP.

jreback · 2017-12-11T11:36:25Z

.travis.yml

@@ -79,6 +80,9 @@ matrix:
      - dist: trusty
        env:
          - JOB="2.7_SLOW" SLOW=true
+      - dist: trusty
+        env:
+        - JOB="3.6_CONDA_BUILD_TEST" TEST_ARGS="--skip-slow" BUILD_TEST=true


need a space here, this line has to EXACTLY match the one above. add back --skip-network to TEST_ARGS

don't add this to the allowed failures, it should be a main build test only

bobhaffner · 2017-12-12T02:23:47Z

Hi @jreback, should I remove BUILD_TEST(soon to be PIP_BUILD_TEST) from allowed failures as well?

jreback · 2017-12-12T02:45:38Z

leave these as they r for the location of allowed failures

bobhaffner · 2017-12-12T13:27:13Z

Hey @jreback, Its obvious this one is out of my depth so I'm packing it in. I appreciate the advice and the patience. Let me know if you want me to re-submit the original PR

jreback · 2017-12-12T13:28:56Z

no prob i will finish this up from here
thanks!

but feel free to work on other issues!

bobhaffner · 2017-12-12T13:45:10Z

Thanks, Jeff. And I intend to. Even though I've made just a couple of contributions, I've really enjoyed it and feel like I've learned a lot.

jreback · 2017-12-15T02:19:24Z

superseded by #18787

jreback requested changes Dec 1, 2017

View reviewed changes

jreback added the Build Library building on various platforms label Dec 1, 2017

bobhaffner force-pushed the update_conda_build_recipe branch from dcdf988 to bf34fcd Compare December 10, 2017 18:25

jreback reviewed Dec 10, 2017

View reviewed changes

jreback requested changes Dec 11, 2017

View reviewed changes

bobhaffner added 11 commits December 11, 2017 21:19

conda recipe update

0df2e88

BLD: updated conda recipe to be conda-bld 3plus compliant

533045a

BLD: removed pytz and python-dateutil from build

90c18f0

changes from rebase

4937f53

post rebase changes

d9dd758

adding CONDA_BUILD_TEST

17c0095

updated whatsnew

15c25fb

fixed indentation in .travis.yml

ef9dce3

rm .run and moved whatsnew entry

9500fd5

added conda install conda-build

388ddc1

changes from review

d0c77a6

bobhaffner force-pushed the update_conda_build_recipe branch from 8b70712 to d0c77a6 Compare December 12, 2017 03:20

jreback mentioned this pull request Dec 15, 2017

use / test modern conda recipe #18787

Merged

jreback closed this Dec 15, 2017


		conda install conda-build

		conda build ./conda.recipe/ --numpy 1.11 --python 3.6 -q

Uh oh!

BLD: updated conda recipe to be conda-bld 3plus compliant #18592

BLD: updated conda recipe to be conda-bld 3plus compliant #18592

Uh oh!

Conversation

bobhaffner commented Dec 1, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jreback Dec 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bobhaffner commented Dec 1, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback commented Dec 1, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bobhaffner commented Dec 1, 2017

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Dec 1, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Dec 1, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

bobhaffner commented Dec 3, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback commented Dec 3, 2017

Uh oh!

bobhaffner commented Dec 3, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback commented Dec 3, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback Dec 10, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jreback Dec 10, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bobhaffner commented Dec 10, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback Dec 11, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jreback Dec 11, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jreback Dec 11, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bobhaffner commented Dec 12, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback commented Dec 12, 2017

Uh oh!

bobhaffner commented Dec 12, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback commented Dec 12, 2017

Uh oh!

bobhaffner commented Dec 12, 2017

Uh oh!

jreback commented Dec 15, 2017

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jreback commented Dec 1, 2017 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 1, 2017 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 1, 2017 •

edited

Loading