On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 8:39 PM Gael Varoquaux <
gael.varoqu...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:42:49PM +0200, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> > It gets ever-easier to install new Python versions, with
> pyenv/conda/etc. The "my single Python install comes from python.org and
> I'm using
On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 11:28 PM Brigitta Sipőcz <
b.sipocz+numpyl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any way to know if other large libraries hasn't set an upper pin
> in their last release but since then dropped python version support?
>
This should be doable with either the PyPI JSON API
On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:42:49PM +0200, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> It gets ever-easier to install new Python versions, with pyenv/conda/etc. The
> "my single Python install comes from python.org and I'm using the same one
> because I am afraid to upgrade" is much less of an issue than it was 10 year
Hi,
Is there any way to know if other large libraries hasn't set an upper pin
in their last release but since then dropped python version support?
Brigitta
On Fri, 10 May 2024 at 07:47, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:28 AM Thomas Caswell wrote:
>
>> I think the spirit of
On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 8:47 AM Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:28 AM Thomas Caswell wrote:
>
>> I think the spirit of NEP 29 is to pick your supported Python's when you
>> pick a target release date and you should then stick to it (to avoid "we
>> delayed so long we are over
On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:28 AM Thomas Caswell wrote:
> I think the spirit of NEP 29 is to pick your supported Python's when you
> pick a target release date and you should then stick to it (to avoid "we
> delayed so long we are over a cliff" decisions like this one).
>
That's true I believe.
I think the spirit of NEP 29 is to pick your supported Python's when you
pick a target release date and you should then stick to it (to avoid "we
delayed so long we are over a cliff" decisions like this one).
We did NEP29 around the same time that Python went from 18 to 12 month
releases (my memor
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 6:03 AM Henry Schreiner wrote:
>
> This will be messier for projects building wheels and wanting to support
> non-EoL Python versions. To build a wheel with anything other than pybind11,
> you now need the oldest supported NumPy for Python < 3.9, the latest NumPy 1
> for
On Mon, 2024-05-06 at 22:39 +, Henry Schreiner wrote:
> This will be messier for projects building wheels and wanting to
> support non-EoL Python versions. To build a wheel with anything other
> than pybind11, you now need the oldest supported NumPy for Python <
> 3.9, the latest NumPy 1 for Py
I'm sorry to have used scikit-image as an example as it is an active
project (with Juan and other core dev even replying to this thread)
and we can try to release 0.22.1 just for this purpose.
But, what I'm trying to do is to avoid the churn that many other developers
will have when this gets rolle
This will be messier for projects building wheels and wanting to support
non-EoL Python versions. To build a wheel with anything other than pybind11,
you now need the oldest supported NumPy for Python < 3.9, the latest NumPy 1
for Python 3.9, and NumPy 2 for Python 3.10+. I don't know if that's
On Tue, 2024-05-07 at 11:41 +0200, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 11:31:02AM +0200, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> > make `pip install scikit-image==0.22` work if that version of
> > scikit-image depends on an unconstrained numpy version.
>
> Would an option be for the scikit-image maintai
I guess this is also a mandatory read after Henry's blog post appeared that
we had an extensive discussion with Python devs
https://discuss.python.org/t/requires-python-upper-limits/12663
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:35 AM Sebastian Berg
wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-05-07 at 15:46 +1000, Juan Nunez-Iglesi
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:44 AM Gael Varoquaux <
gael.varoqu...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 11:31:02AM +0200, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> > make `pip install scikit-image==0.22` work if that version of
> scikit-image depends on an unconstrained numpy version.
>
> Would an option be
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 11:31:02AM +0200, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> make `pip install scikit-image==0.22` work if that version of scikit-image
> depends on an unconstrained numpy version.
Would an option be for the scikit-image maintainers to release a version of
scikit-image 0.22 (like 0.22.1) with
On Tue, 2024-05-07 at 15:46 +1000, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote:
> On Tue, 7 May 2024, at 7:04 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> > This problem could have been avoided by proper use of upper bounds.
> > Scikit-image 0.22 not including a `numpy<2.0` upper bound is a bug
> > in scikit-image (definitely for ABI
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 7:48 AM Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote:
> On Tue, 7 May 2024, at 7:04 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
> This problem could have been avoided by proper use of upper bounds.
> Scikit-image 0.22 not including a `numpy<2.0` upper bound is a bug in
> scikit-image (definitely for ABI reason
On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 11:43 PM Aaron Meurer wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 3:05 PM Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> >
>
> > So, I think I'm in favor of dropping Python 3.9 support after all to
> prevent problems. It is late in the game, but I do see that we're going to
> cause problems for packages tha
On Tue, 7 May 2024, at 7:04 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> This problem could have been avoided by proper use of upper bounds.
> Scikit-image 0.22 not including a `numpy<2.0` upper bound is a bug in
> scikit-image (definitely for ABI reasons, and arguably also for API reasons).
> It would really be u
On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 3:05 PM Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 10:42 PM Oscar Benjamin
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 19:59, Aaron Meurer wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Mark Harfouche
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I'm asking that you let Python 3.9 suppor
On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 10:42 PM Oscar Benjamin
wrote:
> On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 19:59, Aaron Meurer wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Mark Harfouche
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm asking that you let Python 3.9 support disappear with 1.26, and
> not "drop a final version" before you decide
On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 19:59, Aaron Meurer wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Mark Harfouche
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm asking that you let Python 3.9 support disappear with 1.26, and not
> > "drop a final version" before you decide to move on with 3.10+ only.
>
> I don't understand NumPy suppo
On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Mark Harfouche wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 6:46 AM Sebastian Berg
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 2024-05-06 at 09:17 +1000, Matti Picus wrote:
>> > On 05/05/2024 11:32, Mark Harfouche wrote:
>> >
>> > but to me it makes sense to support it for the
>> > large 2.0 re
On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 6:46 AM Sebastian Berg
wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-05-06 at 09:17 +1000, Matti Picus wrote:
> > On 05/05/2024 11:32, Mark Harfouche wrote:
> >
> > but to me it makes sense to support it for the
> > large 2.0 release.
>
> The release will not be without problems rippling throughou
On Mon, 2024-05-06 at 09:17 +1000, Matti Picus wrote:
> On 05/05/2024 11:32, Mark Harfouche wrote:
>
> >
> > Thank you for considering this last minute request. I know it adds
> > work at this stage.
> >
> > Mark
>
>
> I think NumPy should not be the leader in dropping versions, rather
> sh
On 05/05/2024 11:32, Mark Harfouche wrote:
I know this is somewhat the 11th hour for the numpy 2.0 release but as
downstream packager and user of numpy, I would really like to ask that
Numpy strives to adhere to NEP29, and SPEC0
SEPC0 makes it pretty clear that Python 3.9 should not be includ
26 matches
Mail list logo
