Relax pins to major versions and refreeze, introduce explicit jupyter_server v1 pin #1283
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
consideRatio
changed the title
consideRatio
force-pushed
the
pr/relax-pinning-and-refreeze
branch
from
c0cb2a3
to
8bb242d
Compare
consideRatio
commented
Jun 8, 2023
Comment on lines
-7
to
+13
| - ipywidgets==8.0.2 | ||
| - jupyter-offlinenotebook==0.2.2 | ||
| - jupyter-resource-usage==0.7.0 | ||
| - jupyterlab==3.4.8 | ||
| - jupyterhub-singleuser==3.1.1 | ||
| - notebook==6.4.12 | ||
| - ipywidgets==8.* # https://github.com/jupyter-widgets/ipywidgets | ||
| - jupyter-offlinenotebook==0.2.* # https://github.com/manics/jupyter-offlinenotebook | ||
| - jupyter-resource-usage==0.7.* # https://github.com/jupyter-server/jupyter-resource-usage | ||
| - jupyter_server==1.* # https://github.com/jupyter-server/jupyter_server | ||
| - jupyterhub-singleuser==3.* # https://github.com/jupyterhub/jupyterhub | ||
| - jupyterlab==3.* # https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab | ||
| - notebook==6.* # https://github.com/jupyter/notebook |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are teh changes to review in this PR. We go from various minor/patch versions to the latest available in the same major version.
jupyter-server was pinned explicitly, as it was indirectly pinned by jupyterlab 3.4 which when upgraded to jupyterlab 3.5+ wasn't indirectly pinned any more, and that broke tests we had and would been a significant change we want to do intentionally in a separate PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
R test failures shows up in the main branch as well, and tracking that is done now in #1284. I believe them to be entirely unrelated from this PRs changes.
|
Thank you @yuvipanda!!!!!! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I figured we should go for a refreeze, but I saw that we were pinning to the patch versions of various packages in repo2docker/buildpacks/conda/environment.yml which is too conservative I think.
In this PR I unpin minor and patch versions in that file, and refreeze. I think this is critical for the sustainability of maintenance.
Practically, I think its very sustainable and relevant for us to review bumps in the major version of all of these separately, and okay to hold back on bumping a major version until we do. But I don't think its a good practice or sustainable to review and bump minor/patch versions manually in the same way.
If we retain the minor/patch version pining, my process before refreeze would be to bump these manually in a commit, practically working around having them pinned. If I wouldn't do that, I fear that we would only do so because someone explicitly requests a version bump to get some new feature, or that something has broken because of a transient dependency was updated that needs a newer version for compatibility.
Review notes