PR: CI: Add workflow to run tests with PyQt6/PySide6 #23118
Conversation
| push: | ||
| branches: | ||
| - master | ||
| - qt6_ci # for testing only |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Using a cron-based trigger is probably more sensible for now?
The qt6_ci is for testing only and will be removed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Using a cron-based trigger is probably more sensible for now?
I don't think so. We should run the Qt6 slots as we do for other ones so we know when we break things for that version.
The qt6_ci is for testing only and will be removed
Ok, no problem.
| # .github/scripts/run_tests.sh || \ | ||
| # .github/scripts/run_tests.sh || \ | ||
| # .github/scripts/run_tests.sh || \ | ||
| .github/scripts/run_tests.sh |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Commented out for faster testing.
| # env: | ||
| # GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For testing only, will be re-added
| - name: Run tests | ||
| shell: bash -l {0} | ||
| env: | ||
| # GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For testing only, will be re-added
For now the tests run on Linux only. Only pip-based installation is used as conda has no PyQt6 package yet. The workflow file based on the existing one for Linux.
Fix 'extras_require' in setup.py to fix the warning. This requires fixes for the parsing of dependencies in test_dependencies_in_sync.py: Use the 'packaging' module which simplifies the code.
Set parent object for QTimer and don’t use singleShot() static method. This prevents the timer from being fired after the parent object is destroyed. The issue has been discovered with PyQt6 by test [1]. [1] spyder/plugins/editor/extensions/tests/test_closequotes.py::test_close_quotes
Some tests explicitly close the editorstack widget. qtbot also closes the widget after the test finishes. The latter action may fail when "delete on close" flag is set => reset the flag.
|
@ccordoba12 I have added two PyQt6 fixes to this PR. There are still failures I haven’t looked into; see [1] for the most current CI run as of today. Nevertheless, I think we could consider merging the PR in order to move forward with Qt 6 support. Note there are some review comments [2]. Regarding PySide6 support: In [3] you mentioned that you have PySide6 related fixes. Would you mind providing them? We are more than happy to help the project with the Qt 6 transition (both PySide6 and PyQt6). PS: You may have noticed that we provided less patches in 2024 than in the years before. This is because we had a stable experience with v5.4, and especially so with v5.5. Thank you and the whole dev team very much for this great project ❤️ [1] https://github.com/procitec/spyder/actions/runs/12652008190 |
I'm really happy to see that there are really few failures! That's awesome!
Agreed. Please skip the failing tests for Qt6 and post a list of them in a comment here. Then I'll merge.
I'll try to do it soon (hopefully next week). But I think it'd be better to comment the PySide6 CI slots for now and work on support for it after my PR is merged. What do you think?
Thanks a lot! That will help us to provide more features in 6.1 for you and all other users.
Thanks for your kind words. We're really happy to hear that your experience with Spyder has improved significantly in the last two years. |
|
About the failure in |
Description of Changes
This is a draft to add PyQt6/PySide6 to the CI as suggested in PR #22620:
Issue(s) Resolved
Affirmation
By submitting this Pull Request or typing my (user)name below,
I affirm the Developer Certificate of Origin
with respect to all commits and content included in this PR,
and understand I am releasing the same under Spyder's MIT (Expat) license.
I certify the above statement is true and correct:
rear1019