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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Improved
tox
env isolation:py36
andpy37
install runtime dependenciesenvs
act only on the src files and do not perform installation nor deps installationdocs
env now matches (hopefully) the ReaTheDocs build env, related with ReadTheDocs Mock configuration #16 mock configuration and does not usetox
installedtaurenmd
dependencies.During this process I faced a problem with
coverage report
results. With thetox
config previous to this PR the coverage was reporting correctly, but with the separation oftestenv
frompy36
coverage results diverge and decorator lines are registered as uncovered, but only in online repositories, locally coverage reports properly. I ended up removing the clean and report envs and add those ascommand_pre
andcommand_post
options, I found this to solve the solution locally.I did try as much as I could solutions, may be in a future PR this can be solved. For know I am closing it, because improvements in tox env management really pay off.
Useful links for future reference:
I think the problem is that reflected in the first link, but I do not see why this configuration does not solve the problem, SPECIALLY, because the problem happens during the transfer from Travis-CI and coverage servers, locally and on travis-ci logs everything looks good. I am too puzzled.
This PR is a repeat from #18 because I though coverage reports there (in coverage servers) were getting contaminated from previous commits.