-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 153
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
Declare and test support up to Python 3.9 and PyQt6 #253
Comments
Hi @CAM-Gerlach yep I think we should merge #252, then #251 and then we can take care of updating the test workflow. Also, do you want to help with this @CAM-Gerlach ? |
Sounds good. Sure can do. |
python 3.9 already works fine |
dalthviz
changed the title
Declare and test support for Python 3.9 and/or 3.10
Declare and test support for 3.10 and PyQt6
Oct 21, 2021
CAM-Gerlach
changed the title
Declare and test support for 3.10 and PyQt6
Declare and test support for Python 3.10 and PyQt6
Oct 21, 2021
16 tasks
dalthviz
changed the title
Declare and test support for Python 3.10 and PyQt6
Declare and test support r Python 3.10 and PyQt6
Oct 25, 2021
dalthviz
changed the title
Declare and test support r Python 3.10 and PyQt6
Declare and test support up to Python 3.10 and PyQt6
Oct 25, 2021
CAM-Gerlach
changed the title
Declare and test support up to Python 3.10 and PyQt6
Declare and test support up to Python 3.9 and PyQt6
Oct 26, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
As discussed in PR #229 , Python 3.9 has been released upstream, on AD, on CF and on GH Actions for some time, so it would be seem to be worth bumping the upper bound of the CI matrix at least to it (which would expand our support range while not proliferating CI jobs, per the current build matrix strategy) and fixing any issues that are found, as well as declaring support in the Trove classifiers. Furthermore, Python 3.10 was just formally released a couple weeks ago and is now available on all the same channels, so it should be usable in our CIs as well. If supported by PyQt/Pyside (at least the Qt6-based versions; we could potentially set up a custom build matrix if needed) and our other test deps, we could consider adding support for it as well and having it be the upper bound version in our matrix instead. This might be a simple change, or it would be rather involved (though more important) if we don't fully support it already.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: