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

CI workflow failing: lint (3.10) is trying to use python3.9 #1699

Closed
sparrowt opened this issue Apr 18, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

CI workflow failing: lint (3.10) is trying to use python3.9 #1699

sparrowt opened this issue Apr 18, 2023 · 5 comments
Milestone

Comments

@sparrowt
Copy link
Contributor

sparrowt commented Apr 18, 2023

Problem

Recently the 'CI' workflow has been failing because for some reason the lint (3.10) step is trying to find python3.9

Run tox -v -e flake8 -- -v
flake8: find interpreter for spec PythonSpec(major=3, minor=9)
...
flake8: skipped because could not find python interpreter with spec(s): python3.9
  flake8: SKIP (0.61 seconds)
  evaluation failed :( (0.84 seconds)
Error: Process completed with exit code 255.

This seems to be happening on all PRs e.g. like this

Cause

#1663 added python 3.10 to CI and set it as the python-version under lint in ci.yaml but didn't change the basepython for flake8 and friends in tox.ini to match.

Looking back to the change for python 3.9 (4f77faa) we do see that flake8 & friends were moved down a line so I think the same needs to happen here (though it feels odd that we have to specify the same thing in 2 places).

@open-collective-bot
Copy link

Hey @sparrowt 👋,
Thank you for opening an issue. We will get back to you as soon as we can.
Also, check out our Open Collective and consider backing us - every little helps!

We also offer priority support for our sponsors.
If you require immediate assistance please consider sponsoring us.

@auvipy
Copy link
Member

auvipy commented Apr 18, 2023

thanks a lot for the investigation

@sparrowt
Copy link
Contributor Author

Np! I was going to open a PR today but I see you already have ❤ #1700

@stegayet
Copy link
Contributor

This has been fixed in #1718, thanks a lot for your initial investigation @sparrowt 😄

@auvipy auvipy closed this as completed May 16, 2023
@auvipy auvipy added this to the 5.3 milestone May 16, 2023
@auvipy
Copy link
Member

auvipy commented May 16, 2023

thanks both of you

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants