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

Re-run tests to verify function with jupyter_server 2 now released #65

Closed
consideRatio opened this issue Dec 30, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #67
Closed

Re-run tests to verify function with jupyter_server 2 now released #65

consideRatio opened this issue Dec 30, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #67

Comments

@consideRatio
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not grasping how everything works, but I think there is a test suite setup in this repo to run a test involving jupyter_server. Can we run that test suite now that jupyter_server 2 is out and see if it succeeds, or if there is something to fix in this repo?

I was led to think about this as I observed the failure noticed "parent suite setup failed" and was thinking perhaps that was related to this repo rather than the failing test in the jupyterhub/jupyter-server-proxy relying on this project.

image

Related source code in this repo

dependencies:
- jupyter_server >=1.2

matrix:
# The Matrix
#
# This is the single source-of-truth of what we currently support
# - the matrix (with excludes) is parsed in project.py
# - the excursions are in env_specs, e.g. lab1.yml
# - to regenerate the specs, requires `conda-lock`:
#
# rm -rf .github/locks
# doit -n4 lock
#
conda-subdir: [win-64, osx-64, linux-64]
python-version: [py3.7, py3.10]
lab-version: [lab1, lab2, lab3]

@consideRatio
Copy link
Contributor Author

I ran tests in a fork

Lock files needs to be updated

@bollwyvl could you update the lock files so we can test with jupyter_server 2 here? I'm not sure how to do that atm.

Related but off topic: a practice I've come to appreicate to help others onboard people in projects is to co-locate a README.md file that very briefly (~1 paragraph) links to relevant tools and mentions a command to run or so. If you update these files, maybe you can create a README.md to help someone like me onboard to contribute with such chore tasks?

@bollwyvl
Copy link
Collaborator

yep, there's not a ton to do (basically update the spec file for lab3) but actually adding another dimension is non-trivial.

README.md

That would be the CONTRIBUTING.md and section of the docs.

@consideRatio
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ah thank you, i can trial out things later then! Have a good new year @bollwyvl!

@bollwyvl
Copy link
Collaborator

from the ci pr: i think the issue is we do need to keep lab3 vs server1, irrespective of python version, which we'll likely drop in the next release, anyway.

we should probably drop retrolab entirely, as it is no longer receiving updates, though i was waiting until notebook 7 became available to make that shift.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants