-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 291
Support GraalPy #1538
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
Merged
+287
−38
Merged
Support GraalPy #1538
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e64cfe6
Properly close files used for testing
timfel f90aa4e
Add support for GraalPy
timfel 60358e9
Help GraalPy discover build tools on Windows
timfel fb9c855
Expect manylinux-interpreters ensure graalpy* warning in pip
timfel cb2d4e9
Workaround GraalPy bugs on Windows
timfel d808a34
Workaround oracle/graalpython#491 also when uv is not available
timfel 4a425f9
[pre-commit.ci] auto fixes from pre-commit.com hooks
pre-commit-ci[bot] b06c429
Update azure-pipelines.yml
henryiii a59a1e1
Update azure-pipelines.yml
henryiii a4410f5
refacotor: use pathlib.write_text
henryiii a47e354
Include GraalPy in docker_warmup and remove workaround for installing…
timfel File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wheels have to be made for each minor version too? I guess this means we can't drop all the workarounds until we drop
gp242
(unless there's a patch release planned)?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We are doing patch releases, I missed the merge window for a patch release that goes out next week, but I'm confident I can get the required fixes in for our patch release in June, at which time we can drop this.
Versioning is a bit confusing right now, we used to do calendar versioning with two releases per year, but we are switching to align with the OpenJDK release schedule and will then have 2 releases per year. At that point every 4th release will be a long-term support release, releases in between will only receive support for 6 months. The upcoming release 25 (due out in Sep) will be an LTS, so we could then stick to that for 2 years and also have 26/27/28 each for 6 months until we go to 29 at which point 25 is out of support.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So in terms of ABI stability, a sample wheel I just produced was given the filename
spam-0.1.0-graalpy311-graalpy242_311_native-manylinux_2_5_x86_64.manylinux1_x86_64.manylinux_2_28_x86_64.whl
. So it does look like there's only ABI stability within each minor release of GraalPy (i.e. across patch releases), is that right?(I just want to check the logic behind this build identifier, as most have the python version at the start, not the interpreter version. But if the ABI stability is tied to the GraalPy minor version, this makes sense to me.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we've got a plan for how to handle this if PyPy ever has a new ABI other than 7.3?
I'd assume GraalPy would hopefully bump the Python version once a year, but that's still two releases per Python version, so it seems unavoidable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Triggered by this discussion, we are changing the way handle ABI changes and will align with CPython in that we only break our ABI once a year, in the GraalPy release that happens around the same time of the CPython release in the latter half of the year. So our spring release will keep the ABI stable and then adopting new GraalPy ABI will happen in the same timeframe were cibuildwheels and other projects update to the new CPython version, too. Would that be ok?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the identifier does not play well with
requires_python
, c.f. #2410