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

SQLAlchemy 2.0 #530

Closed
immanelg opened this issue Jan 30, 2023 · 18 comments
Closed

SQLAlchemy 2.0 #530

immanelg opened this issue Jan 30, 2023 · 18 comments
Labels
feature New feature or request

Comments

@immanelg
Copy link

Will there be support for SQLAlchemy 2.0 or I should just use it directly?

@tarsil
Copy link
Contributor

tarsil commented Feb 28, 2023

@madkinsz Apologies as missed this one. So as far as I could understand, its not planned to give support to SQLA 2.0?

@Kludex
Copy link
Sponsor Member

Kludex commented Feb 28, 2023

We need someone to maintain this package. 🤷

@Kludex
Copy link
Sponsor Member

Kludex commented Feb 28, 2023

I'm not able to review a PR with that bump here...

Any of you are? @rafalp @aminalaee

@rafalp
Copy link
Member

rafalp commented Feb 28, 2023

If PR's comes up that bumps SQLAlchemy support to 2.0, I'm fine with it. But I have no resources to develop one myself.

@tarsil
Copy link
Contributor

tarsil commented Feb 28, 2023

@rafalp @Kludex no worries. Give me a few days and I will have a look and open a PR with a possible integration with SQLA 2.0

We are looking at possible backwards incompatible changes. Last time I tried a few things were changed internally within SQLA.

I don't see a reason to have forks of this package just to add SQLA 2.0 when databases is already maintained

@Kludex
Copy link
Sponsor Member

Kludex commented Feb 28, 2023

Cool. 👍

Thanks. 🙏

@tarsil
Copy link
Contributor

tarsil commented Feb 28, 2023

No problem. I have products depending of databases and having the support for 2.0 we can leverage python 3. 2.0 does not support python 2 anymore.

@samuela
Copy link

samuela commented Jul 15, 2023

any update on this issue? I'd really like to use slack-sdk which depends on databases but cannot due to this version constraint

@zanieb
Copy link
Contributor

zanieb commented Jul 15, 2023

@samuela there is #539 but it has unaddressed questions and could use another contributor

@samuela
Copy link

samuela commented Jul 15, 2023

Thanks @zanieb ! I ended up finding a workaround for the time being

samuela added a commit to samuela/nixpkgs that referenced this issue Jul 15, 2023
`python3Packages.databases` is broken due to encode/databases#530. Luckily, it turns out that `databases` was not a necessary dependency anyways. See slackapi/python-slack-sdk#1388.
@caarmen
Copy link

caarmen commented Jul 15, 2023

@samuela Could you share some details of your workaround? 🙏🏻

@zanieb
Copy link
Contributor

zanieb commented Jul 15, 2023

@caarmen they removed the package entirely as seen in f9236b3

@ImEins
Copy link

ImEins commented Sep 21, 2023

Can you guys tell us if you plan to add support for sqlalchemy 2.0 ?

@zanieb
Copy link
Contributor

zanieb commented Sep 25, 2023

@ImEins there is no maintainer that is going to implement it as this time. I will review a contribution adding support.

@Distortedlogic
Copy link

update?

@zanieb
Copy link
Contributor

zanieb commented Dec 8, 2023

The work at #539 is stalled as the author is busy with other things.

@ansipunk
Copy link

We did this. #540. Is there a timeframe for a release? @tomchristie

@tarsil
Copy link
Contributor

tarsil commented Feb 22, 2024

@ansipunk there is one PR opened yesterday that requires some attention. Hopefully today or tomorrow can be merged and we can perform a release.

@zanieb zanieb closed this as completed Mar 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

10 participants