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

Further _from_sequence #899

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 26, 2023
Merged

Further _from_sequence #899

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 26, 2023

Conversation

martindurant
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@martindurant
Copy link
Member Author

@jrbourbeau , applying the same code change elsewhere, which seems to work on pandas 1.5 too. I am mystified why changing to remove the regression on one spot made the other two spots start to fail - or maybe pandas pushed point update release to both 2x and 1.5x lines.

@jrbourbeau
Copy link
Member

Thanks @martindurant. I just confirmed all Dask parquet tests are now passing with Python 3.10 + pandas 1.5.3 + this branch

I am mystified why changing to remove the regression on one spot made the other two spots start to fail

I think it was always failing earlier in the callstack on line 202

@martindurant martindurant merged commit 1f90f1a into dask:main Oct 26, 2023
21 checks passed
@martindurant martindurant deleted the dt_again branch October 26, 2023 18:42
@martindurant
Copy link
Member Author

2023.10.1 sdist is on pypi, wheels are building and conda-forge will kick off in due course.

@jrbourbeau
Copy link
Member

Thank you @martindurant (cc @mrocklin for visiblity)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants