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

Consider dropping Python 4 upper bound #1986

Closed
hauntsaninja opened this issue Nov 6, 2022 · 5 comments
Closed

Consider dropping Python 4 upper bound #1986

hauntsaninja opened this issue Nov 6, 2022 · 5 comments

Comments

@hauntsaninja
Copy link

hauntsaninja commented Nov 6, 2022

Version capping makes it the case that isort definitely won't work with an eventual Python 4. If not for the cap, since Python 4 is unlikely to be extremely disruptive (especially to pure Python applications), isort would likely continue to work.

My interest here is that any poetry projects that use isort (even just as a dev dependency) also end up needing to cap Python versions, causing these pessimistic assumptions to proliferate.

This section of https://iscinumpy.dev/post/bound-version-constraints/#pinning-the-python-version-is-special contains more details.

Would you be willing to entertain a PR that drops the upper bound here?

python = ">=3.6.2,<4.0"

@juhannc
Copy link

juhannc commented Nov 7, 2022

Python 4 unlikely to happen according to Guido van Rossum himself so I don't think it will be a problem.
It's probably better to watch out for new releases and see if and how they break isort.

@hauntsaninja
Copy link
Author

Yes, dropping the upper bound is very much in line with the philosophy "watch out for new releases and see if and how they break isort", treating 4 like any other release instead of pessimistically assuming that it will break isort :-)

@staticdev
Copy link
Collaborator

staticdev commented Nov 17, 2022

@timothycrosley could you please create a new release of isort (and example plugins) with the changes we merged here #1878? This will enable me to create a new PR to solve this.

@sisp
Copy link

sisp commented Nov 18, 2022

Duplicate of #1945.

@staticdev
Copy link
Collaborator

@hauntsaninja fixed on 5.11.0.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants