[PKG SUPPORT] pylint <3 and Python 3.12

[valeriupredoi]

Hey fellas, a quick touching base from one of your conda-feedstock maintainers here - the new v1.10.3 builds well now conda-forge/prospector-feedstock#43 - but I had to pin upper pylint to <3, see failed test with pylint=3 - and since I vaguely understand poetry environment files, I wanted to double check pylint is upper pinned to <3 upstream (here) too. Incidentally, Python 3.12 support seems to work fine for you, so I'd suggest you included a Github Action test for 3.12 as well (seen you guys have them all Pythons but no 3.12 GA test yet). Cheers and keep up the good work 🍺

[carlio]

Hi there, thank you for the report, I will add it to my TODO list along with pylint-dev/pylint-django#405
to handle some small changes needed to support the pylint3 release

[valeriupredoi]

Good man, Carl! Cheers 🍺

[ryancausey]

Is there anything I can do to help resolve this? I'm still running into the issue originally noted in #651.

[Pierre-Sassoulas]

The pipeline is broken on main, there's a potential fix in #658, you can review that, or propose another approach. Then #645 is addressing this issue directly and could be merged after a rebase.

[ryancausey]

#658 seems like a reasonable workaround to get 3.12 support out the door, but I'm also not an expert in prospector or pyroma. Assuming there are other pyroma tests in the suite, there should be some confidence that it doesn't actually break prospector's integration with pyroma.

[valeriupredoi]

@ryancausey cheers, mate! That's what my take is too - also, one clue is that workaround in #658 is needed only for when tests run on Github Actions, local tests run fine without it - beats me what changes in the file that the test runs on GA, but I suspect that's just a minor change like a trailing white space or some newline char, that gets picked up by the pyroma test

[ryancausey]

#658 seems like a reasonable workaround to get 3.12 support out the door, but I'm also not an expert in prospector or pyroma. Assuming there are other pyroma tests in the suite, there should be some confidence that it doesn't actually break prospector's integration with pyroma.

@Pierre-Sassoulas was my review above of any use?

[ryancausey]

Anything more I can do to help move this along?

[carlio]

Sorry that I have been absent for a while, I will try to get onto this in the next few days...

[valeriupredoi]

very happy to see you back @carlio - we was getting concerned 🍺