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

Creosote 4.0 heads-up #257

Open
fredrikaverpil opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 · 9 comments · May be fixed by #260
Open

Creosote 4.0 heads-up #257

fredrikaverpil opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 · 9 comments · May be fixed by #260
Assignees
Labels
pinned Won't be taken into staleness consideration

Comments

@fredrikaverpil
Copy link
Owner

fredrikaverpil commented Nov 18, 2024

Here's a list of stuff that would break backwards compatibility and bump creosote to v4.0. Might be good to try to consider all these things before releasing the next major version.

Also, I personally am not using creosote and therefore this is not a priority for me. I merely keep the lights on here.

So consider this a FYI and feel free to help out if you use creosote 😄

  • Drop Python 3.8 support.
  • Update type hinting for Python 3.9.
  • Fix slew of basedpyright and typing warnings.
  • Change release tagging to omit the v prefix or somehow make release-please workflow be able to accurately update .pre-commit-config.yaml.
  • Hopefully get Python: add support for __about__.py googleapis/release-please#2433 considered, or potentially move to using __init__.py for storing the version (or just store the version in pyproject.toml).
@fredrikaverpil fredrikaverpil self-assigned this Nov 18, 2024
@fredrikaverpil fredrikaverpil pinned this issue Nov 18, 2024

This comment was marked as resolved.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Nov 27, 2024

This comment was marked as resolved.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Dec 2, 2024
@sanmai-NL
Copy link
Contributor

@fredrikaverpil I suppose you want to reopen this?

I wanted to suggest looking at https://github.com/thebjorn/pydeps, which scans Python bytecode for imports, which may be faster than scanning package metadata.

@fredrikaverpil
Copy link
Owner Author

Thanks @sanmai-NL that's an interesting suggestion.

This project is more or less in maintenance mode and I'm not planning any major improvements other than keeping the lights on. So we'll see. I'm not currently planning any of this work - just really collecting all the stuff I've been thinking of doing but which would bump major.

@sanmai-NL
Copy link
Contributor

@fredrikaverpil Even reducing the maintenance burden might in itself be an interesting goal. For example, what if you could leverage pydeps' output rather than adopting their approach.

This comment was marked as resolved.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Dec 11, 2024
@sanmai-NL
Copy link
Contributor

@fredrikaverpil I don't see why maintainers are attracted to these simplistic bots...

This comment was marked as resolved.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Dec 20, 2024
@fredrikaverpil fredrikaverpil linked a pull request Dec 26, 2024 that will close this issue

This comment was marked as resolved.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Dec 30, 2024
@fredrikaverpil fredrikaverpil added pinned Won't be taken into staleness consideration and removed Stale labels Dec 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pinned Won't be taken into staleness consideration
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants