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

Relax ruff constraints to allow installing next to ruff 0.3.0 #85

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 1, 2024

Conversation

vodik
Copy link
Contributor

@vodik vodik commented Feb 29, 2024

Seems to work fine and unit tests all pass on the new ruff 0.3.0 release.

Seems to work fine on the new ruff 0.3.0 release
pyproject.toml Outdated
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ readme = "README.md"
requires-python = ">=3.8"
license = {text = "MIT"}
dependencies = [
"ruff>=0.2.0, <0.3.0",
"ruff>=0.2.0, <0.4.0",

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it an idea to remove the upper limit altogether? I think by now the burden of having to bump and release each time outweighs the risk of API changes.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I had that thought as well, but it's pre 1.0 so there's no guarantee that there won't be breaking changes on minor version.

Either works for me though.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I checked with ruff-lsp where there also is no upper constraint so I would be okay with that

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks a lot!

@jhossbach jhossbach merged commit 46141e5 into python-lsp:main Mar 1, 2024
5 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants