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

Remove upper version bound from fsspec #2143

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Feb 6, 2024
Merged

Conversation

pingsutw
Copy link
Member

@pingsutw pingsutw commented Jan 30, 2024

Why are the changes needed?

Allow users to use the latest fsspec by removing the upper-bound.

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

remove the upper-bound

How was this patch tested?

Setup process

Screenshots

Check all the applicable boxes

  • I updated the documentation accordingly.
  • All new and existing tests passed.
  • All commits are signed-off.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 30, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (3e5e9f8) 85.57% compared to head (885b161) 85.53%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2143      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.57%   85.53%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         308      308              
  Lines       23113    23116       +3     
  Branches     3540     3541       +1     
==========================================
- Hits        19779    19772       -7     
- Misses       2722     2729       +7     
- Partials      612      615       +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
@pingsutw pingsutw marked this pull request as draft January 30, 2024 09:18
@lou-k
Copy link

lou-k commented Feb 5, 2024

Hey @pingsutw I could really use this as the current upper bound limits botocore to pre-aws bedrock releases (llms in flyte are awesome!). I see some of the windows CICD is failing -- are they false positives? Can this be merged? Appreciate any attention you can give this.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
@pingsutw pingsutw marked this pull request as ready for review February 6, 2024 01:18
@@ -431,6 +428,8 @@ def to_literal(
if should_upload:
if remote_directory is None:
remote_directory = ctx.file_access.get_random_remote_directory()
if not os.path.isdir(source_path):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can we use pathlib.Path().is_dir?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

updated it

pingsutw and others added 2 commits February 5, 2024 20:53
Signed-off-by: Kevin Su <pingsutw@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Apolinario <eapolinario@users.noreply.github.com>
@pingsutw pingsutw merged commit 479ba24 into master Feb 6, 2024
78 of 82 checks passed
@lou-k
Copy link

lou-k commented Feb 6, 2024

@pingsutw Thank you so very much! You're a rock star!

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.

4 participants