Update CIs to use `julia-actions/install-juliaup`
Also replaced the actions/cache with julia-actions/cache.
Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 70.38%. Comparing base (
037dfed) to head (1ef67b4). Report is 351 commits behind head on main.
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
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
what's the advantage of juliaup here? Also we should keep the names 1.10, 1.11, etc explicitly
juliaup is the recommended way to install and use Julia.
The benefits are few but IMHO, we should choose it over setup-julia.
…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
~I looked into some CI runs, and it seems that install-juliaup is the faster setup. (1~2 seconds less)~
Both have similar setup time.
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. If in the future, there were more points, we can open this again.