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

Make modules uniform across buildkite pipelines #1028

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

akshaysridhar
Copy link
Member

@akshaysridhar akshaysridhar commented Oct 17, 2024

Update to use climacommon (auto latest)

	modified:   .buildkite/amip/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/benchmarks/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/hierarchies/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/longruns/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/nightly/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/pipeline.yml

Update to use `climacommon` (auto latest)
	modified:   .buildkite/amip/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/benchmarks/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/hierarchies/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/longruns/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/nightly/pipeline.yml
	modified:   .buildkite/pipeline.yml
@akshaysridhar
Copy link
Member Author

akshaysridhar commented Oct 17, 2024

Is there a reason we currently pin modules in certain pipelines to May `24 versions ?

@juliasloan25
Copy link
Member

Thanks for doing this! I had included this in the Julia 1.11 update #1026 but we can have it separate too (and I missed our regular CI pipeline)

I think it would be better to specify climacommon/2024_10_09 rather than just climacommon, so that we can control when we update to the latest version. For example, 2024_10_09 was released with Julia 1.11 when ClimaCore wasn't yet compatible with it, leading to some bugs in ClimaCoupler. If we use a specific version, we can make any required changes when we update

@akshaysridhar
Copy link
Member Author

akshaysridhar commented Oct 17, 2024

Great, thank you @juliasloan25! I had started this to PR as a solution to some nightly pipeline instantiation issues I was seeing - I agree that being more specific with the version gives us more control and simplifies issue tracking; (I'm happy to close this and fold it into the #1026 PR)

@akshaysridhar
Copy link
Member Author

Closing as this is addressed in #1026 with @juliasloan25 fixing the regular CI pipeline as well.

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