TST/DEP: add missing resolution constraints for the `all` extra by neutrinoceros · Pull Request #18955 · astropy/astropy

neutrinoceros · 2025-11-17T10:47:09Z

Description

ref #18782
complementary to #18949

I'm getting very close to the end goal.

By checking this box, the PR author has requested that maintainers do NOT use the "Squash and Merge" button. Maintainers should respect this when possible; however, the final decision is at the discretion of the maintainer that merges the PR.

github-actions · 2025-11-17T10:47:20Z

Thank you for your contribution to Astropy! 🌌 This checklist is meant to remind the package maintainers who will review this pull request of some common things to look for.

Do the proposed changes actually accomplish desired goals?
Do the proposed changes follow the Astropy coding guidelines?
Are tests added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the Astropy testing guidelines?
Are docs added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the Astropy documentation guidelines?
Is rebase and/or squash necessary? If so, please provide the author with appropriate instructions. Also see instructions for rebase and squash.
Did the CI pass? If no, are the failures related? If you need to run daily and weekly cron jobs as part of the PR, please apply the "Extra CI" label. Codestyle issues can be fixed by the bot.
Is a change log needed? If yes, did the change log check pass? If no, add the "no-changelog-entry-needed" label. If this is a manual backport, use the "skip-changelog-checks" label unless special changelog handling is necessary.
Is this a big PR that makes a "What's new?" entry worthwhile and if so, is (1) a "what's new" entry included in this PR and (2) the "whatsnew-needed" label applied?
At the time of adding the milestone, if the milestone set requires a backport to release branch(es), apply the appropriate "backport-X.Y.x" label(s) before merge.

github-actions · 2025-11-17T10:47:20Z

👋 Thank you for your draft pull request! Do you know that you can use [ci skip] or [skip ci] in your commit messages to skip running continuous integration tests until you are ready?

pyproject.toml

eerovaher · 2025-11-18T18:01:15Z

pyproject.toml

+    # via ipython (can be removed once ipython<8.17 is dropped)
+    "pickleshare>=0.7.5",


Why shouldn't we drop support for ipython<8.17 right now? Then we wouldn't need this constraint at all.

I don't think this represents a maintenance burden so high as to warrant bumping a dependency.

I also want to be extra careful with bumping any optional dependency, as we don't necessarily control how and when users install them; because most end users have long-lived multi-use virtualenvs, they can have same installed before or after they installed astropy, or just not opt into the [ipython] extra (most end users don't know about pip's support for extras...) and I don't think saving ourselves a single line of metadata warrants potentially breaking all these valid use cases.

most end users have long-lived multi-use virtualenvs

Those users are perfectly happy running astropy 5.3 they installed two years ago. Besides, bumping our ipython requirement does not necessarily mean running astropy with an older ipython is impossible, it just means we don't guarantee that it is possible.

And my point is that slightly cleaning up (temporary) metadata is not good enough grounds for renouncing this guarantee. See #18967

In any case, bumping anything is out of scope for this PR, so can we please move along with this one and make clean-ups and bumping into their own discussions ?

neutrinoceros · 2025-11-25T09:45:32Z

This is currently the last PR attached to #18782, so I'm making an attempt to resolve it here. Moving to draft while CI is running 🤞🏻

neutrinoceros · 2025-11-25T12:09:30Z

clearly not ready yet. I'll revert to the previous scope of this PR and will keep track of the remaining issue(s) elsewhere.

neutrinoceros · 2025-12-02T13:08:53Z

@eerovaher @pllim this is the last bit needed to close a large issue, can we postpone any user-visible change to an eventual follow up ?

pllim · 2025-12-02T16:39:34Z

I am okay with this but since @eerovaher had comments, I'll let him approve. Thanks for your patience!

mhvk

This looks nice -- the no-build part is just obviously good, and I like the clear comments about when we can drop indirect dependencies. I think some of that will happen soon, but this sets us up well enough.

mhvk · 2025-12-05T14:52:14Z

I'm going to put this in as it is holding up other work -- we should discuss what we do with optional dependency versions in #18967 (where I think we were not that far from a consensus).

neutrinoceros added this to the v8.0.0 milestone Nov 17, 2025

neutrinoceros added testing no-changelog-entry-needed dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file labels Nov 17, 2025

github-actions bot added the installation label Nov 17, 2025

neutrinoceros mentioned this pull request Nov 17, 2025

TST: towards reproducible builds for oldestdeps #18782

Closed

neutrinoceros force-pushed the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch from 99fe131 to 25dfd7c Compare November 17, 2025 11:25

neutrinoceros marked this pull request as ready for review November 17, 2025 11:27

neutrinoceros force-pushed the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch 2 times, most recently from 51017b7 to d7dc78a Compare November 17, 2025 15:12

pllim requested a review from eerovaher November 17, 2025 15:43

eerovaher reviewed Nov 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

pyproject.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

pyproject.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

neutrinoceros force-pushed the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch 2 times, most recently from 931fd1f to 07a4aa7 Compare November 18, 2025 06:03

eerovaher reviewed Nov 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

pyproject.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

neutrinoceros force-pushed the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch 2 times, most recently from 18df68b to 2c19175 Compare November 18, 2025 16:43

eerovaher reviewed Nov 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

neutrinoceros force-pushed the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch from 2c19175 to 06d271c Compare November 25, 2025 09:44

neutrinoceros marked this pull request as draft November 25, 2025 09:44

neutrinoceros force-pushed the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch from b3e0e56 to 148c1a7 Compare November 25, 2025 12:10

neutrinoceros marked this pull request as ready for review November 25, 2025 12:10

neutrinoceros mentioned this pull request Nov 26, 2025

EXP: make oldestdeps CI reproducible #19000

Merged

1 task

neutrinoceros force-pushed the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch 2 times, most recently from d49beac to e3a22be Compare November 30, 2025 17:08

neutrinoceros mentioned this pull request Dec 3, 2025

Drop support for numpy 1.x #18986

Merged

1 task

neutrinoceros added 2 commits December 3, 2025 22:02

TST/DEP: add missing resolution constraints for the all extra

e3832e9

TST: add final constraints for resolving a lowest env with --all-groups

ce2905c

neutrinoceros force-pushed the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch from f3550ec to ce2905c Compare December 3, 2025 21:02

neutrinoceros mentioned this pull request Dec 3, 2025

CI: add reference lowest env solution + script to check its evolutions #19022

Merged

1 task

mhvk approved these changes Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

TST/DEP: forbid building source-only versions of appnope

ff027cf

mhvk merged commit be1a388 into astropy:main Dec 5, 2025
33 checks passed

neutrinoceros deleted the tst/dep/missing-constraints branch December 5, 2025 14:55

		# via ipython (can be removed once ipython<8.17 is dropped)
		"pickleshare>=0.7.5",

Uh oh!

Conversation

neutrinoceros commented Nov 17, 2025

Description

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 17, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 17, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

eerovaher Nov 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neutrinoceros Nov 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neutrinoceros Nov 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

eerovaher Nov 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neutrinoceros Nov 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neutrinoceros Nov 19, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neutrinoceros commented Nov 25, 2025

Uh oh!

neutrinoceros commented Nov 25, 2025

Uh oh!

neutrinoceros commented Dec 2, 2025

Uh oh!

pllim commented Dec 2, 2025

Uh oh!

mhvk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mhvk commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants