Fix compatibility with Python 3.10, refs #358#359
Conversation
| strategy: | ||
| matrix: | ||
| python-version: [3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9] | ||
| python-version: ["3.6", "3.7", "3.8", "3.9", "3.10"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Necessary to use strings rather than floating point numbers here, because otherwise 3.10 is interpreted as 3.1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd say only wrap "3.10" and keep others as is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's better to wrap them all for consistency, but have no strong opinion on this as long as it would not make future confusion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Both variants work technically.
I prefer the current version; if we process 3.10 as a string -- why others should be numbers? Again, technically the version is not a number but a string.
webknjaz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM but I'll leave this to the maintainers to merge.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #359 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 95.52% 95.45% -0.07%
==========================================
Files 4 4
Lines 1274 1277 +3
Branches 84 86 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 1217 1219 +2
Misses 50 50
- Partials 7 8 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
| strategy: | ||
| matrix: | ||
| python-version: [3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9] | ||
| python-version: ["3.6", "3.7", "3.8", "3.9", "3.10"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's better to wrap them all for consistency, but have no strong opinion on this as long as it would not make future confusion.
|
@asvetlov Could you review & merge this PR to release a new version? |
|
Thanks! |
What do these changes do?
Tests now also run against Python 3.10, and code incorporates a workaround for a bug in Python 3.10 that affects Janus.
Related issue number
Checklist
CHANGESfolder (skipped, not sure how to do this)