Well, creating the tarball on GH is a lot easier for us as it happens automatically! I don’t want to unilaterally change policy so I will create the files on SF.
If you want to tracking GH for debian instead of SF I don’t think that would be a bad idea, but I don’t know how much of a hassle that would be for you.
Tom
···
On Sat Feb 07 2015 at 4:14:36 PM Sandro Tosi <morph@…10…> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell@…287…> wrote:
I am getting some test failures here and on master in the collections module.
···
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell@…287…> wrote:
Sandro,
Well, creating the tarball on GH is a lot easier for us as it happens automatically! I don’t want to unilaterally change policy so I will create the files on SF.
If you want to tracking GH for debian instead of SF I don’t think that would be a bad idea, but I don’t know how much of a hassle that would be for you.
Tom
On Sat Feb 07 2015 at 4:14:36 PM Sandro Tosi <morph@…10…> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell@…287…> wrote:
Aaah dont worry about changing things I can reroute the tools to
track GH no problem, what I need to know if that's the place where the
next tarballs will be released; if so, I will update the tracking
straight away.
Cheers,
···
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell@...287...> wrote:
Well, creating the tarball on GH is a lot easier for us as it happens
automatically! I don't want to unilaterally change policy so I will create
the files on SF.
If you want to tracking GH for debian instead of SF I don't think that would
be a bad idea, but I don't know how much of a hassle that would be for you.
Well, creating the tarball on GH is a lot easier for us as it happens
automatically! I don't want to unilaterally change policy so I will create
the files on SF.
the release tarball contains __pycache__ directories and other binary
files, like lib/matplotlib/backends/_backend_agg.cpython-34m.so
(likely it was generated from a "live" directory, where some tests
have been run).
I just gave a brief look at updating the package and I noticed just
some failures in the tests related to test_axes_grid1 (but it might be
due to an un-clean env, I will re-run in a chroot to be sure), also
any reason not to include
Traceback (most recent call last):
File “/home/ben/miniconda/lib/python2.7/site-packages/nose/case.py”, line 197, in runTest
self.test(*self.arg)
File “/home/ben/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/matplotlib-1.4.x-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/matplotlib/testing/decorators.py”, line 51, in failer
result = f(*args, **kwargs)
File “/home/ben/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/matplotlib-1.4.x-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/matplotlib/testing/decorators.py”, line 196, in do_test
‘(RMS %(rms).3f)’%err)
ImageComparisonFailure: images not close: /home/ben/Programs/matplotlib/result_images/test_collections/regularpolycollection_rotate.png vs. /home/ben/Programs/matplotlib/result_images/test_collections/regularpolycollection_rotate-expected.png (RMS 54.618)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File “/home/ben/miniconda/lib/python2.7/site-packages/nose/case.py”, line 197, in runTest
self.test(*self.arg)
File “/home/ben/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/matplotlib-1.4.x-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/matplotlib/testing/decorators.py”, line 51, in failer
result = f(*args, **kwargs)
File “/home/ben/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/matplotlib-1.4.x-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/matplotlib/testing/decorators.py”, line 196, in do_test
‘(RMS %(rms).3f)’%err)
ImageComparisonFailure: images not close: /home/ben/Programs/matplotlib/result_images/test_collections/regularpolycollection_scale.png vs. /home/ben/Programs/matplotlib/result_images/test_collections/regularpolycollection_scale-expected.png (RMS 120.828)
Ran 54 tests in 15.149s
FAILED (failures=2)
The squares in the first test are larger than they should be. I have some other errors, but they seem to other be floating point errors, or issues with fonts.
Ben Root
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell@…287…> wrote:
Sandro,
Well, creating the tarball on GH is a lot easier for us as it happens automatically! I don’t want to unilaterally change policy so I will create the files on SF.
If you want to tracking GH for debian instead of SF I don’t think that would be a bad idea, but I don’t know how much of a hassle that would be for you.
On Sat Feb 07 2015 at 4:14:36 PM Sandro Tosi <morph@…10…> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell@…287…> wrote: