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

Unpin ASDF #834

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 5, 2023
Merged

Unpin ASDF #834

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 5, 2023

Conversation

WilliamJamieson
Copy link
Contributor

@WilliamJamieson WilliamJamieson commented Jan 3, 2023

Changes

This PR unpins asdf. In asdf version 2.14.3 we specifically fixed the bug introduced in asdf 2.14.0 which lead to #825. This means weldx should be able to unpin asdf now.

Note that I specifically excluded the asdf versions: 2.14.0, 2.14.1, and 2.14.2 as they all experience the bug reported in #825.

Related Issues

Closes #825

Checks

  • updated CHANGELOG.rst

@WilliamJamieson WilliamJamieson changed the title Unpin asdf from above as asdf 2.14.3 fixes issue #825 Unpin ASDF Jan 3, 2023
@CagtayFabry
Copy link
Member

Thank you @WilliamJamieson 😊

We will probably consolidate this with #829 and discard older asdf versions for the next release to clean up some APIs as well (we are just slightly behind on the PRs over the holiday season 😉)

@WilliamJamieson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you @WilliamJamieson 😊

We will probably consolidate this with #829 and discard older asdf versions for the next release to clean up some APIs as well (we are just slightly behind on the PRs over the holiday season 😉)

No problem, I noticed in the ASDF downstream tests that weldx was pinning ASDF, which made pip complain. However, everything seemed to be passing.

I didn't even check to see if you had a PR unpinning ASDF, so feel free to close this PR if you want.

@marscher
Copy link
Contributor

marscher commented Jan 4, 2023

I prefer this kind of pinning, where the incompatible versions are listed explicitly. Thanks a lot!

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 4, 2023

Test Results

2 184 tests  ±0   2 183 ✔️ ±0   2m 28s ⏱️ -11s
       1 suites ±0          1 💤 ±0 
       1 files   ±0          0 ±0 

Results for commit d9efe8d. ± Comparison against base commit db750a4.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 4, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #834 (d9efe8d) into master (db750a4) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #834   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.82%   96.82%           
=======================================
  Files          92       92           
  Lines        6055     6055           
=======================================
  Hits         5863     5863           
  Misses        192      192           

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@CagtayFabry
Copy link
Member

I prefer this kind of pinning, where the incompatible versions are listed explicitly. Thanks a lot!

I agree, however we don't currently run any compatibility tests for older asdf versions
If we introduce those I would feel a bit more at ease keeping the older versions

@marscher marscher added ASDF everything ASDF related (python + schemas) dependencies changes in package dependencies labels Jan 5, 2023
@marscher marscher merged commit 706cc95 into BAMWelDX:master Jan 5, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ASDF everything ASDF related (python + schemas) dependencies changes in package dependencies
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

asdf-2.14.1 leads to a condition where weldx extension is found twice.
3 participants