Stop running CompatHelper on root project again #1063
Merged
+1
−26
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In #1021 I enabled to run CompatHelper on the root project, but seeing the flood of PRs this morning and thinking about it some more, I think this was a mistake. We should close all those PRs.
Compat is needed in core for all dependencies. For other dependencies, in principle we shouldn't declare compat, since we use a Manifest anyway. This is similar to the way we allow any version in pixi.toml, and the monthly pixi.lock update also brings in possibly breaking changes that we can then evaluate.
We could have compat entries in the root project. Those makes sense if we are not compatible with newer breaking releases to hold it back. This way the manifest update will not bring in this incompatible release. We should not forget about these, so ideally we have an issue labeled
tech-debtfor those.