-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 68
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 CIs to use julia-actions/install-juliaup
#1987
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1987 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 67.50% 70.38% +2.88%
==========================================
Files 31 33 +2
Lines 12668 14593 +1925
==========================================
+ Hits 8552 10272 +1720
- Misses 4116 4321 +205 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
what's the advantage of juliaup here? Also we should keep the names 1.10, 1.11, etc explicitly |
|
…but for CI where versions are always fixed? imo we should use whatever reduces setup latency since these jobs are run constantly. cc @vchuravy if you have thoughts here |
|
If that's the case I really don't see the value add here? My understanding of juliaup is that essentially it's a script which download's the right julia version binary as required, then dispatches to that. Which, is all good for making users lives' easier. But in this CI context, we'll never need that functionality, and it feels like it would add extra points of failure/latency, no? |
I don't think it would be any more failures. but feel free to close this one. |
Also replaced the
actions/cache
withjulia-actions/cache
.