-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
Add support for Python 3.13 #131
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -84,8 +84,12 @@ dependencies: | |||||
| packages: | ||||||
| - python=3.12 | ||||||
| - matrix: | ||||||
| py: "3.13" | ||||||
| packages: | ||||||
| - python>=3.10,<3.13 | ||||||
| - python=3.13 | ||||||
| - matrix: | ||||||
| packages: | ||||||
| - python>=3.10,<3.14 | ||||||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @jakirkham Do you have thoughts on how to coordinate this suggestion with the proposal to drop all alpha specs? rapidsai/build-planning#144 I am inclined to say we should leave this as-is, but I don’t have strong feelings.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Suppose we could have a different pin for conda & pip That said, given one needs to opt-in to use RCs from conda-forge. It doesn't seem like that big of a risk |
||||||
| run: | ||||||
| common: | ||||||
| - output_types: [conda, requirements, pyproject] | ||||||
|
|
||||||
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.
Should we figure out a better way to keep workflow references like these updated?
Understand doing this for
pynvjitlinkalone may not be worth it. However we have a few projects not following RAPIDS versioning that could benefit from a similar solutionUh 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.
We have settled on doing these updates on an ad-hoc basis. I only changed them here because this PR was originally going to use the branch
python-3.13but it turned out that isn’t necessary because the CI build/test matrix for pynvjitlink is independent of the shared-workflows matrix. It felt more appropriate to update to the latest version rather than revert the changes.