Ruff 0.11.0 #16723
Ruff 0.11.0 #16723
Conversation
CHANGELOG.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ## 0.11.0 | ||
|
|
||
| This is largely a follow-up release to Ruff 0.10.0 because we accidentally didn't include the new `requires-python` inference changes. Ruff 0.11.0 now includes this change as well as the stabilization of `PGH004`'s preview behavior |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any suggestions for how we could phrase this instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about:
This is a follow-up to release 0.10.0. Because of a mistake in the release process, the
requires-pythoninference changes were not included in that release. Ruff 0.11.0 now includes this change as well as the stabilization of the preview behavior forPGH004.
|
MichaReiser
requested review from
charliermarsh,
dhruvmanila,
dylwil3 and
ntBre
dylwil3
left a comment
dylwil3
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good! Possible re-wording suggestion and a question on whether we should further edit the 0.10 changelog.
CHANGELOG.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| > Note: Because of a mistake in the release process, the `requires-python` inference changes are not included in this release and instead shipped as part of 0.11.0. | ||
| In previous versions of Ruff, you could specify your Python version with: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we delete the rest of the section and end the note above by saying "The description of this change can be found in the changelog entry for 0.11.0" or something along those lines?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think so, especially since they're so close together. We could even strikethrough the headline? That might be going too far, though.
BREAKING_CHANGES.md
Outdated
| > Note: Because of a mistake in the release process, the `requires-python` inference changes are not included in this release and instead shipped as part of 0.11.0. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks like we could use a NOTE1 here if we want:
Note
Because of a mistake in the release process, the requires-python inference changes are not included in this release and instead shipped as part of 0.11.0.
I'm not sure if that will render everywhere this file is displayed, though, maybe only on GitHub.
Footnotes
CHANGELOG.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| > Note: Because of a mistake in the release process, the `requires-python` inference changes are not included in this release and instead shipped as part of 0.11.0. | ||
| In previous versions of Ruff, you could specify your Python version with: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think so, especially since they're so close together. We could even strikethrough the headline? That might be going too far, though.
* main: [red-knot] Use `try_call_dunder` for augmented assignment (#16717) [red-knot] Document current state of attribute assignment diagnostics (#16746) [red-knot] Case sensitive module resolver (#16521) [red-knot] Very minor simplification of the render tests (#16759) [syntax-errors] Unparenthesized assignment expressions in sets and indexes (#16404) ruff_db: add a new diagnostic renderer ruff_db: add `context` configuration red_knot: plumb through `DiagnosticFormat` to the CLI ruff_db: add concise diagnostic mode [syntax-errors] Star annotations before Python 3.11 (#16545) [syntax-errors] Star expression in index before Python 3.11 (#16544) Ruff 0.11.0 (#16723) [red-knot] Preliminary tests for typing.Final (#15917) [red-knot] fix: improve type inference for binary ops on tuples (#16725) [red-knot] Assignments to attributes (#16705) [`pygrep-hooks`]: Detect file-level suppressions comments without rul… (#16720) Fallback to requires-python in certain cases when target-version is not found (#16721)
Summary
Follow-up release for Ruff v0.10 that now includes the following two changes that we intended to ship but slipped:
target-versionis not specified (Fallback torequires-pythonin certain cases whentarget-versionis not found #16319)blanket-noqa(PGH004): Also detect blanked file-level noqa comments (and not just line level comments).Test plan
I verified that the binary built on this branch respects the
requires-pythonsetting (logs, left: v0.10, right: v0.11)