Re: yz/p4-py3, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2020, #04; Wed, 22)

From: Yang Zhao <yang.zhao@skyboxlabs.com>
Date: Jan 23, 2020, 18:27 UTC
Message-ID: <CABvFv3KRAA9i75qBWDpnOro+CKRfqtPbh+LwpB1+EN+GwRGkkQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2001231306351.46@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 4:11 AM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:

> Should we declare `t98xx` to be the namespace for the Python-based
> scripts, or alternatively declare that we won't ever include another
> Python script but `git-p4`?

Seeing how git-p4 has de facto taken over t98xx, declaring the former makes sense. I intend to introduce more features into git-p4 so it'll probably be practical to reserve more of the space for it, probably up to t9850.

On declaring `git-p4` the sole approved use of python, I'm personally OK with it if there's no appetite to better integrate Python on Windows.

Show 10 quoted lines

> But yes, I think that we should probably "tack on" the Python 3.x tests to
> the `linux-gcc` job.
>
> Or maybe finally split this job into three: ...
>
> The reason to split it off is this: on rare occasion, I have to restart
> the `linux-gcc` job because _one_ of those `git-p4` tests failed due to
> some reason or other, probably timing-related, I did not have time to
> investigate this. Having to re-run the entire test suite, twice, just to
> work around those flaky tests is rather wasteful.

Agreed.

-- 
yang