-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
Removed code deprecated in qiskit-terra 0.21, released on June 2022 #10754
Conversation
Thank you for opening a new pull request. Before your PR can be merged it will first need to pass continuous integration tests and be reviewed. Sometimes the review process can be slow, so please be patient. While you're waiting, please feel free to review other open PRs. While only a subset of people are authorized to approve pull requests for merging, everyone is encouraged to review open pull requests. Doing reviews helps reduce the burden on the core team and helps make the project's code better for everyone. One or more of the the following people are requested to review this:
|
|
I am unsure about |
I'm with @woodsp-ibm, I think it's best to leave algorithms-related code untouched until its removal. |
I agree that leaving out My apologies for including it originally. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I moving this PR as draft, as it seems to need some extra work before reviewing. Don't forget to add a release note:
create a release note in the category upgrade:. If you can include an example with an alternative for user to migrate to the new code, as this change might break users code.
Take a look to the conflicts! When ready for review, hit |
Thank you for opening a new pull request. Before your PR can be merged it will first need to pass continuous integration tests and be reviewed. Sometimes the review process can be slow, so please be patient. While you're waiting, please feel free to review other open PRs. While only a subset of people are authorized to approve pull requests for merging, everyone is encouraged to review open pull requests. Doing reviews helps reduce the burden on the core team and helps make the project's code better for everyone. One or more of the the following people are requested to review this:
|
I mean, by "take a look" I wanted to say "resolve the conflicts". Sometimes my word choice is not the best. My bad. |
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 6244303397
💛 - Coveralls |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for taking care of this! It is a complicated one. I think some of the tests should be migrated instead of removed. Would you like to have a shoot at that?
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
test/benchmarks/scheduling_passes.py
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not fully sure, but I think these tests should be migrated, as they are test/benchmarks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think they are already migrated here in benchmarks/scheduling_passes.py.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Similarly, these tests should be migrated to the new workflow, I think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have checked similiar tests in benchmarks/transpiler_levels.py. Can you please elaborate about this? Should we add a github workflow for them ?
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/removed_deprecated_0.21-6c93f7bbc50ae40e.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I migrated the benchmark tests to the new style. The rest, let's merge. Thanks!
In Qiskit#10754 3 legacy scheduling passes were accidently deleted. These passes were incorrectly identified as deprecated, however they were never marked as deprecating just pending future deprecation. They were intended to be be promoted from a pending deprecation to a full deprecation in Qiskit#8023 but we never took that step because there were objections at the time as they still served a purpose. Qiskit#10754 likely missed this as the only indication in the deprecation decorator was a kwarg that said `pending=True`, and this was the only indication that these passes weren't actually deprecated yet. This commit restores these passes on the 0.45.0 branch in the interest of unblocking the 0.45.0 release ASAP. We can handle forward porting this PR to main as needed after the 0.45.0 release is tagged.
In Qiskit#10754 3 legacy scheduling passes were accidently deleted. These passes were incorrectly identified as deprecated, however they were never marked as deprecating just pending future deprecation. They were intended to be be promoted from a pending deprecation to a full deprecation in Qiskit#8023 but we never took that step because there were objections at the time as they still served a purpose. Qiskit#10754 likely missed this as the only indication in the deprecation decorator was a kwarg that said `pending=True`, and this was the only indication that these passes weren't actually deprecated yet. This commit restores these passes on the 0.45.0 branch in the interest of unblocking the 0.45.0 release ASAP. We can handle forward porting this PR to main as needed after the 0.45.0 release is tagged.
In #10754 3 legacy scheduling passes were accidently deleted. These passes were incorrectly identified as deprecated, however they were never marked as deprecating just pending future deprecation. They were intended to be be promoted from a pending deprecation to a full deprecation in #8023 but we never took that step because there were objections at the time as they still served a purpose. #10754 likely missed this as the only indication in the deprecation decorator was a kwarg that said `pending=True`, and this was the only indication that these passes weren't actually deprecated yet. This commit restores these passes on the 0.45.0 branch in the interest of unblocking the 0.45.0 release ASAP. We can handle forward porting this PR to main as needed after the 0.45.0 release is tagged.
In #10754 3 legacy scheduling passes were accidently deleted. These passes were incorrectly identified as deprecated, however they were never marked as deprecating just pending future deprecation. They were intended to be be promoted from a pending deprecation to a full deprecation in #8023 but we never took that step because there were objections at the time as they still served a purpose. #10754 likely missed this as the only indication in the deprecation decorator was a kwarg that said `pending=True`, and this was the only indication that these passes weren't actually deprecated yet. This commit restores these passes on the 0.45.0 branch in the interest of unblocking the 0.45.0 release ASAP. We can handle forward porting this PR to main as needed after the 0.45.0 release is tagged. (cherry picked from commit aa272e9)
In #10754 3 legacy scheduling passes were accidently deleted. These passes were incorrectly identified as deprecated, however they were never marked as deprecating just pending future deprecation. They were intended to be be promoted from a pending deprecation to a full deprecation in #8023 but we never took that step because there were objections at the time as they still served a purpose. #10754 likely missed this as the only indication in the deprecation decorator was a kwarg that said `pending=True`, and this was the only indication that these passes weren't actually deprecated yet. This commit restores these passes on the 0.45.0 branch in the interest of unblocking the 0.45.0 release ASAP. We can handle forward porting this PR to main as needed after the 0.45.0 release is tagged. (cherry picked from commit aa272e9) Co-authored-by: Matthew Treinish <mtreinish@kortar.org>
It fixes #10748
Summary
Details and comments
Please tag it asChangelog: Removal