[Bioperl-l] BioPerl and Travis-CI
Fields, Christopher J
cjfields at illinois.edu
Fri Jul 27 11:15:19 EDT 2012
On Jul 27, 2012, at 10:03 AM, Peter Cock wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Fields, Christopher J
> <cjfields at illinois.edu> wrote:
>> On Jul 27, 2012, at 9:47 AM, Peter Cock wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> That's done now - except for the circular dependencies, and GD,
>>>> which might be easy to solve if anyone knows what the error
>>>> means - see commit message here:
>>> Re: https://twitter.com/cjfields/status/228861370454638592
>>> Not sure why you got GD to work when something very similar
>>> had failed for me. Oh well - job done :)
>> It was the lack of gdlib-config in the libgd2-xpm package, you need
>> libgd2-xpm-dev. One of the fun things about Debian packaging.
> Ah - I should have guessed that.
>>>> Would a single clean commit of the (current) .travis.yml file be
>>>> preferable to the current series of commits? And you you want
>>>> a pull request, or would you just merge/cherry-pick manually?
>>> Given all the churn between our revisions, personally I'd opt for
>>> a single clean commit to bioperl/master - but your call.
>> Yep, about to merge it over. It's working now, just need to
>> whitelist master instead of travis after the merge.
> I'd removed the whitelist altogether here:
> My thinking was BioPerl seems to have multiple feature branches
> under the official repo, so they should get tested too. You'd be
> in a better position than me to judge what would work best for
> BioPerl here.
We'll keep it to master for now. It's pretty easy to add branches as needed, and I didn't want to expand to all the potentially stale branches unless explicitly set (we need to triage all those at some point).
More information about the Bioperl-l