Yes, that is a good point. What about including a conspicuous message in 
the test log? Something like "Please visit this site / contact Iain if 
something is wrong with the previously run tests".

On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 4:46:51 PM UTC-5, Iain Dunning wrote:
>
> Yeah, that sort of thing. Except, I don't want it to be that conspicuous 
> because 99.99% visiting the package aren't package developers.
>
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Josh Langsfeld <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> By a link, do you mean to the github repo for people to visit if 
>> something is wrong with their package listing? It seems to me a short 
>> sentence/link at the top of pkg.julialang.org would be best for that.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Iain Dunning <[email protected] 
>> <javascript:>> wrote:
>>
>>> Please do file an issue! And if you have a suggestion for where to put a 
>>> link, please let me know - I've never been able to figure it out.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Iain
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 10:29:54 AM UTC-5, Josh Langsfeld wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the info. Unstated in my question was that I didn't know 
>>>> where to go to pursue this so I'm glad you pointed me to the right place.
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 10:05:42 AM UTC-5, Avik Sengupta wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The pkg.julialang.org checks slightly different things from the 
>>>>> travis tests. In particular, while the travis tests run only when there 
>>>>> is 
>>>>> a change to the package code, these tests run nightly, and catch any 
>>>>> package breakage due to changes to Julia, or any of your package 
>>>>> dependencies. 
>>>>>
>>>>> If your dependencies are easy to install on linux, then I'm sure Ian 
>>>>> will be happy to discuss installing them on the server. Alternatively, 
>>>>> some 
>>>>> packages can be marked "Untestable" rather than broken, if their 
>>>>> dependencies are difficult to acquire. Packages with proprietary 
>>>>> commercial 
>>>>> dependencies are marked this way, for example.  Either way, you can raise 
>>>>> an issue at https://github.com/IainNZ/PackageEvaluator.jl/issues to 
>>>>> discuss the specifics for your package. 
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> -
>>>>> Avik
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, 22 January 2015 14:51:16 UTC, Josh Langsfeld wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a fairly minor topic, but thought I'd bring it up anyway. I 
>>>>>> noticed the pkg.julialang.org listings generate pass/fail info for 
>>>>>> the package tests by running the tests locally rather than hooking into 
>>>>>> Travis. This is a problem for me as my Travis script involves installing 
>>>>>> dependencies, and so it will always list as "Tests fail" as things 
>>>>>> currently are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a way to have it display the travis build status instead?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Josh
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> *Iain Dunning*
> PhD Candidate 
> <http://orc.scripts.mit.edu/people/student.php?name=idunning> / MIT 
> Operations Research Center <http://web.mit.edu/orc/www/>
> http://iaindunning.com  /  http://juliaopt.org
>  

Reply via email to