Add same environments to Azure, except py37-freeze

[nicoddemus]

PyPy needs a little more work I suspect

[nicoddemus]

Failing on two envs because apparently that Windows image does not contain the build tools for Python 2.7 (fails to build xfreeze and twisted). All other envs passed, the entire build took 17 minutes which, even we are missing PyPy, is very promising.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #4793 into master will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4793      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.66%   95.64%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         113      113              
  Lines       25150    25151       +1     
  Branches     2498     2498              
==========================================
- Hits        24059    24056       -3     
- Misses        771      772       +1     
- Partials      320      323       +3

Flag	Coverage Δ
#docs	29.58% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#doctesting	29.58% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#linting	29.58% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#linux	95.47% <0%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
#nobyte	92.2% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#numpy	92.99% <0%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
#pexpect	41.97% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#pluggymaster	93.71% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#py27	93.67% <0%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
#py34	91.58% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#py35	91.61% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#py36	91.64% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#py37	93.81% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#trial	92.99% <0%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
#windows	93.67% <0%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
#xdist	93.69% <0%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
testing/freeze/create_executable.py	0% <0%> (ø)	⬆️
src/_pytest/cacheprovider.py	95.75% <0%> (-1.42%)	⬇️

---

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 f0a9f90...9cb504c. Read the comment docs.

[nicoddemus]

I'm really excited about the timings we are getting:

Queued
37m ago
Started after 1m 57s in queue
35m ago
Completed after 15m 54s
19m ago

And as of this writing both Travis and AppVeyor have not even started. 👍

[blueyed]

Nice.

Would be good btw to not trigger AppVeyor/Travis from here.

I'm not sure if they support "[skip …]" from the PR title, but then you could add it to commits, or manually cancel them after pushing.

[nicoddemus]

Would be good btw to not trigger AppVeyor/Travis from here.

My bad, should have added [skip travis] [skip appveyor] to the commits

[nicoddemus]

Ready for review. Let's please squash all changes during merging.

Only standing issue #4807

[nicoddemus]

Nice, took 15 minutes, even faster than Travis. 👍

[blueyed]

Let's please squash all changes during merging.

You have to force-push yourself.. but could be done after review / before merging.
Not time for it myself currently though.

Is it meant to replace AppVeyor in the long run?

[nicoddemus]

Is it meant to replace AppVeyor in the long run?

Yep! So far it looks promising. Still need coverage though.

[nicoddemus]

Rebased. 👍

[nicoddemus]

Yep! So far it looks promising. Still need coverage though.

Oh btw I meant in a future PR. I think we should merge this now and see if it behaves well over the next PRs (we of course can ignore it if it fails for weird reasons).

[nicoddemus]

@blueyed @asottile, gentle ping. 👍

I'm anxious to see this live to see how it behaves on daily basis.

[asottile]