-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
Add support for Python 3.13 #131
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
Changes from 3 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 | ||||||
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
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. 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
pynvjitlink
alone may not be worth it. However we have a few projects not following RAPIDS versioning that could benefit from a similar solutionThere 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-3.13
but 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.