GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | ||||||||||||||||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | ||||||||||||||||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — chore: Loosen fsspec requirements to allow recent releases by cburroughs · Pull Request #3922 · feast-dev/feast Conversation
cburroughs
commented
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. 5 changed around the api and current tests do not pass without modification.
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. All reactions
Collaborator
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. I also stumbled into this, any idea why CI isn't failing as well?
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. All reactions
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. I suspect that some transitive dependency was previously holding it back.
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. All reactions
Collaborator
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. Moto v5 just released last week though, that's why CI succeeded
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. All reactions
cburroughs
force-pushed
the
csb/fsspec-loosen
branch
from
9f780a4 to
730e720
Compare
Collaborator
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
cburroughs
force-pushed
the
csb/fsspec-loosen
branch
2 times, most recently
from
3ed7e10 to
2a71a61
Compare
Contributor
Author
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Collaborator
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. (I'm not sure the project has a super consistent pattern for when to specify a maximum version, but was going for the smallest possible change.) Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs <[email protected]>
cburroughs
force-pushed
the
csb/fsspec-loosen
branch
from
2a71a61 to
0786e44
Compare
Contributor
Author
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs <[email protected]>
cburroughs
force-pushed
the
csb/fsspec-loosen
branch
from
0786e44 to
d6e312f
Compare
franciscojavierarceo
approved these changes
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. lgtm
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. All reactions
tqtensor
pushed a commit
to tqtensor/feast
that referenced
this pull request
…#3922) * chore: Loosen fsspec requirements to allow recent releases (I'm not sure the project has a super consistent pattern for when to specify a maximum version, but was going for the smallest possible change.) Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs <[email protected]> * drop redundant fsspec now that this is in another extra Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs <[email protected]> * post rebase regen Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs <[email protected]> --------- Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs <[email protected]>
cburroughs
added a commit
to cburroughs/feast
that referenced
this pull request
In feast-dev#3922 the fsspec requirement was loosened to allow what was then more recent releases. Since then Feast has further reduced the number dependencies with upper bounds. Instead of re-testing each month (when fsspec usually releases) it would now be idiomatic only specify a minimum bound. The new minimum bound was chosen to match what was last locked in ci, since that is what was tested and we can be less sure older versions also work. Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
ReviewersUh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. AssigneesNo one assignedLabelsProjectsMilestoneNo milestoneDevelopmentSuccessfully merging this pull request may close these issues. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. 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. | ||||||||||||||||
| You are visitor 01402520 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up. Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required. |