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

Python 3.13 support #2306

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Python 3.13 support #2306

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

mayty
Copy link

@mayty mayty commented Nov 22, 2024

Related issue: 2305

@mayty mayty marked this pull request as ready for review November 22, 2024 13:02
@king-phyte
Copy link

Since 3.8 is EOL, shouldn't we drop support for that too?

@mayty
Copy link
Author

mayty commented Dec 9, 2024

I think that Python 3.8 doesn't conflict with adding Python 3.13 support and dropping it is outside of this PR's scope

@king-phyte
Copy link

Fair point :)

@@ -14,7 +14,9 @@
"argparse",
"array",
"ast",
"asynchat",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please remove these.

They were all removed in 3.12:

https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.12.html#asynchat-and-asyncore

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can remove it, but it was added by the scripts. So it will automatically appear on the next run because it's still present in the corresponding documentation: https://docs.python.org/3.12/library/asynchat.html#module-asynchat

Mb it would be better to use stdlibs package or adopt it's approach to modules generation?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Aha, the problem was caused by the docs re-adding module pages which had bee removed, but as stubs:

python/cpython#126622

Mb it would be better to use stdlibs package or adopt it's approach to modules generation?

Yeah, sounds like a good idea to use stdlibs 👍

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

updated the script to use stdlibs and ran it

"argparse",
"array",
"ast",
"asynchat",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Similarly, this list contains lots of modules that have been removed in 3.12 or earlier.

Was this list created using the mkstdlibs.py script?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

all changes to stdlibbs/py*.py were generated by mkstdlibs.py scripts

Copy link
Contributor

@hugovk hugovk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you!

@DanielNoord
Copy link
Member

Awesome! Could you rebase this so we can get this merged?

@mayty
Copy link
Author

mayty commented Jan 9, 2025

I had to drop python3.8 support to make builds pass on python3.13 because some packages required a version, which do not support python3.8 (not sure how it passed before the make actions happy PR merge)

At the same time, the prod package could have been installed with both 3.8 and 3.13, so I'm open to rolling back this commit if 3.8 support is considered more important than builds with python3.13 in PRs

@hugovk
Copy link
Contributor

hugovk commented Jan 9, 2025

I think it's fine to drop 3.8, as mentioned before, it's already EOL:

We could merge this as-is and do a more thorough 3.8 cleanup in another PR.

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.

4 participants