gh-153227: Use a development version of Pygments#153228
Conversation
ZeroIntensity
requested review from
AA-Turner,
StanFromIreland and
hugovk
as code owners
ZeroIntensity
added
the
needs backport to 3.15
|
@hugovk Any advice on the CI failure here? I don't think |
|
Perhaps if we use the archive instead of VCS? |
| # The Sphinx version is pinned so that new versions that introduce new warnings | ||
| # won't suddenly cause build failures. Updating the version is fine as long | ||
| # as no warnings are raised by doing so. | ||
| # Keep this version in sync with ``Doc/conf.py``. | ||
| pygments @ git+https://github.com/pygments/pygments@2cad2642058441b59782a6a18f03c98c42d081f1 | ||
| sphinx<9.0.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This comment block applies to Sphinx, so move the pygments line further down.
And let's add a comment, something like:
# Temporary direct requirement,
# pending release of Pygments > 2.20.0
# https://github.com/pygments/pygments/discussions/3145
pygments @ etc
| # uv pip compile requirements.txt --exclude-newer P14D --exclude-newer-package linklint=PT0S --exclude-newer-package python-docs-theme=PT0S --no-cache --output-file Doc/pylock.toml --python-version 3.12 --universal | ||
| lock-version = "1.0" | ||
| created-by = "uv" | ||
| requires-python = ">=3.12" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We did need to manually remove this line to workaround a packaging bug, but I think that might be fixed now. Let's leave this here and find out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It failed in the CI the last time IIRC, right? In that case it's passing now!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the details are in #149058.
pypa/packaging#1178 was fixed in pypa/packaging#1179 but not actually released yet.
What fixed it is python/release-tools#394 changing our dev version from 3.15.0b1+ to 3.15.0b1+dev to comply with PEP 440.
That's only been applied to 3.15+, so 3.14 and older will need to keep requires-python until the next packaging release (and perhaps pip to vendor it).
We could also consider applying python/release-tools#394 to 3.14 and older.
Anyway, we only have this pylock.toml in 3.15+, and only need this pygments lazy fix for 3.15+, so we're all good :)
Documentation build overview
38 files changed ·
|
That did it! |
StanFromIreland
left a comment
StanFromIreland
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to make sure we can definitely keep requires-python = ">=3.12" before landing this. I might be misremembering, so I’ll wait for Hugo. Otherwise, LGTM.
hugovk
left a comment
hugovk
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to make sure we can definitely keep requires-python = ">=3.12" before landing this. I might be misremembering, so I’ll wait for Hugo.
Yes we can, see: #153228 (comment).
Thanks!
|
Thanks @ZeroIntensity for the PR, and @hugovk for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.15. |
|
GH-153254 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.15 branch. |
bedevere-app
Bot
removed
the
needs backport to 3.15
3 participants
uv decided to upgrade other dependencies in
pylock.toml; I didn't see any failures, so I decided to leave it.lazy importis not highlighted in the docs #153227