Skip to content

Test against Python 3.11 in PR checks #106

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 16, 2022
Merged

Test against Python 3.11 in PR checks #106

merged 3 commits into from
Nov 16, 2022

Conversation

bgrant
Copy link
Collaborator

@bgrant bgrant commented Nov 11, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Test against Python 3.11 in PR checks.

  • Update CHANGELOG.md
  • Update README.md (as needed)
  • New dependencies were added to requirements.txt or requirements-dev.txt
  • pip install succeeds with a clean virtualenv
  • There are new or modified tests that cover changes
  • Test coverage is maintained or expanded

@bgrant bgrant requested a review from demianbrecht November 11, 2022 03:33
@bgrant bgrant marked this pull request as ready for review November 11, 2022 03:38
@bgrant bgrant changed the title Test Python 3.11 Test against Python 3.11 in PR checks Nov 11, 2022
demianbrecht
demianbrecht reviewed Nov 15, 2022
View reviewed changes
pyproject.toml
@@ -23,5 +23,5 @@ exclude = '''
omit = ["*/tests/*", "*/management/*", "*/migrations/*"]

[tool.coverage.report]
fail_under = 91
fail_under = 90
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Any idea why there's a coverage decrease?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good question - I don't know. It seems to be an issue with 3.11.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

And by "issue" I really mean "difference".

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@bgrant bgrant Nov 16, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe this, fixed in Coverage 6.4.2:

Updated for a small change in Python 3.11.0 beta 4: modules now start with a line with line number 0, which is ignored. This line cannnot be executed, so coverage totals were thrown off. This line is now ignored by coverage.py, but this also means that truly empty modules (like init.py) have no lines in them, rather than one phantom line. Fixes nedbat/coveragepy#1419.

https://github.com/nedbat/coveragepy/blob/master/CHANGES.rst#version-642--2022-07-12

demianbrecht
demianbrecht approved these changes Nov 15, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@demianbrecht demianbrecht left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, curious about the coverage decrease though

@bgrant bgrant merged commit c6de503 into main Nov 16, 2022
@bgrant bgrant deleted the chore/test-python-3.11 branch November 16, 2022 14:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@demianbrecht demianbrecht demianbrecht approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@bgrant @demianbrecht