Skip to content
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.

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

Update CI.yml #62

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 8, 2024
Merged

Update CI.yml #62

merged 4 commits into from
Jan 8, 2024

Conversation

jschepers
Copy link
Collaborator

Trying to fix failing CI for documentation.
Changed Julia version from "1" to "1.9".

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 8, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (f8b603f) 69.74% compared to head (0bdbeda) 69.74%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #62   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   69.74%   69.74%           
=======================================
  Files          10       10           
  Lines         314      314           
=======================================
  Hits          219      219           
  Misses         95       95           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@jschepers
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Okay, with Julia 1.9 it works. So it seems to be the interplay between Julia 1.10 and Documenter.jl as suggested in this issue.

@jschepers
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I also identified the example block which causes the issue:
This code snipped
grafik
gets translated (by Literate) to:
grafik

which is apparently a problem since the example block only contains a comment.

Therefore, I will remove this comment and set the Julia version back to '1'.

docs/literate/reference/onsettypes.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/literate/reference/onsettypes.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/literate/reference/onsettypes.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/literate/reference/onsettypes.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/literate/reference/onsettypes.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@unfoldtoolbox unfoldtoolbox deleted a comment from github-actions bot Jan 8, 2024
@@ -276,6 +276,4 @@ end
# - if `offset` > `length(signal.basis)` -> no overlap
# - if `offset` < `length(signal.basis)` -> there might be overlap, depending on the other parameters of the onset distribution


## Footnotes # hide
# [^1]: Wikipedia contributors. (2023, December 5). Log-normal distribution. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 12:27, December 7, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Log-normal_distribution&oldid=1188400077#
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[JuliaFormatter] reported by reviewdog 🐶

Suggested change
# [^1]: Wikipedia contributors. (2023, December 5). Log-normal distribution. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 12:27, December 7, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Log-normal_distribution&oldid=1188400077#
# [^1]: Wikipedia contributors. (2023, December 5). Log-normal distribution. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 12:27, December 7, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Log-normal_distribution&oldid=1188400077#

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@behinger Apparently, the single quotes in the .yml file were changed to double quotes in my VSCode (because I have auto-formatting enabled). Do you think that's fine or shall I change them back?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should be fine

@jschepers
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yeah, CI seems to work again. @behinger could you quickly have a look at the PR and merge it if everything is fine?

@behinger
Copy link
Member

behinger commented Jan 8, 2024

I dont see where you fix it to 1.9 - should the "1" be "1.9" then?

@jschepers jschepers marked this pull request as ready for review January 8, 2024 15:29
@jschepers
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I dont see where you fix it to 1.9 - should the "1" be "1.9" then?

This was only temporary to debug whether the Julia version was related to the issue.

@jschepers jschepers merged commit 5e81675 into main Jan 8, 2024
5 of 6 checks passed
@jschepers jschepers deleted the jschepers-debug_CI branch January 19, 2024 13:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants