Skip to content

TST Automatic retries in travis #1659

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

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Oct 1, 2016
Merged

TST Automatic retries in travis #1659

merged 12 commits into from
Oct 1, 2016

Conversation

berleant
Copy link
Contributor

@berleant berleant commented Sep 23, 2016

issue #1622

I've finished retries for travis. I need to focus on other things so circle will have to wait.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Sep 23, 2016

Current coverage is 70.98% (diff: 100%)

Merging #1659 into master will increase coverage by 0.08%

@@             master      #1659   diff @@
==========================================
  Files          1027       1027          
  Lines         51555      51865   +310   
  Methods           0          0          
  Messages          0          0          
  Branches       7301       7385    +84   
==========================================
+ Hits          36553      36816   +263   
- Misses        13919      13960    +41   
- Partials       1083       1089     +6   

Powered by Codecov. Last update 80c5984...9674584

if $INSTALL_DEB_DEPENDECIES; then
source /etc/fsl/fsl.sh;
source /etc/afni/afni.sh; fi;
export FSLOUTPUTTYPE=NIFTI_GZ; }
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How does failure of one line in this function propagates to the exit code of the whole thing? Since the individual commands are not joined by && wouldn't only the exit code of the last command count in the decision if a retry is needed?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ack, of course.

@berleant
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think this is ready for merge (assuming circleci passes)

@berleant
Copy link
Contributor Author

berleant commented Oct 1, 2016

@chrisfilo

@chrisgorgo chrisgorgo merged commit 9363e42 into nipy:master Oct 1, 2016
@satra satra removed the in-progress label Oct 1, 2016
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.

4 participants