Release 3.9.0

[nicoddemus]

.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #4161 into features will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           features   #4161   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage      95.8%   95.8%           
========================================
  Files           109     109           
  Lines         24208   24208           
  Branches       2387    2387           
========================================
  Hits          23193   23193           
  Misses          720     720           
  Partials        295     295

Flag	Coverage Δ
#docs	28.46% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#doctesting	28.46% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#linting	28.46% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#linux	95.6% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#nobyte	91.86% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#numpy	92.89% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#pexpect	41.29% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#py27	93.93% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#py34	92.26% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
#py35	92.28% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
#py36	93.95% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#py37	92.31% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
#trial	92.89% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#windows	94.03% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#xdist	93.77% <ø> (ø)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e4e4fd1...2868c31. Read the comment docs.

[nicoddemus]

Sadly deployment failed:

HTTPError: 400 Client Error: '"https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/"' is an invalid value for Home-Page. Error: Invalid URI See https://packaging.python.org/specifications/core-metadata for url: https://upload.pypi.org/legacy/

@RonnyPfannschmidt I suspect the problem is this line:

pytest/setup.cfg

Line 6 in e4e4fd1

url = "https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/"

Should this be done without quotes?

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

i think so, i missed the mistake when inspecting the wheels

[nicoddemus]

Bummer. We will have to release 3.9.1 then and mark 3.9.0 on the CHANGELOG as never-released, given that the tag has already been pushed.

[nicoddemus]

Is there some command we can run that inspect the generated wheels to detect this kind of problem in the future? If there is, I would like to run that command as part of our normal testing.

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

im not aware of a tool off-hand - we should consult pypa ^^

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

@nicoddemus dont we need to merge the branch to sort out the release process correctly?
please restore it, then we can add a commit with the note and merge it as starting point for 3.9.1

[nicoddemus]

I would rather not, because we did not in fact released the package.

I think the protocol now should be to open a new release PR for 3.9.1, fix the metadata, and manually adjust the changelog to mention that 3.9.0 was never released.

[nicoddemus]

@RonnyPfannschmidt do you have the time to open the PR fixing the metadata and the new release, or would you like me to do it?

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

@nicoddemus i still haven't resolved my massive issues with regendoc

[nicoddemus]

I think it is fine to just start from my last commit on this branch and then:

1. Fix the metadata;
2. Update the CHANGELOG manually by changing the 3.9.0 release to 3.9.1, and add a new 3.9.0 release below that.

I would do it myself, but I don't know if just removing the quotes from the home page URL is enough to fix 1).

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

I startend a Inquisition im the Details