Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

 Sign up
Appearance settings

Make deprecations versions explicit#17242

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Merged
tacaswell merged 4 commits intomatplotlib:masterfromQuLogic:explicit-deprecations
Apr 30, 2020

Conversation

QuLogic
Copy link
Member

@QuLogicQuLogic commentedApr 25, 2020•
edited
Loading

PR Summary

Messages without%(since)s and%(removal)s will be ambiguous as to when they were deprecated and when they will be removed.

Also clean up extra 'in's in the messages as%(removal)s will add the correct preposition.

PR Checklist

  • Has Pytest style unit tests
  • Code isFlake 8 compliant
  • [N/A] New features are documented, with examples if plot related
  • [N/A] Documentation is sphinx and numpydoc compliant
  • [N/A] Added an entry to doc/users/next_whats_new/ if major new feature (follow instructions in README.rst there)
  • [N/A] Documented in doc/api/api_changes.rst if API changed in a backward-incompatible way

Since this did not previously note a removal version, I bumped it to 3.5(assuming this is merged for 3.3.)
The %(removal)s substition already includes 'in' or whatever prefix isnecessary.
Messages without `%(since)s` and `%(removal)s` will be ambiguous as towhen the were deprecated and when they will be removed.
@QuLogicQuLogic added this to thev3.3.0 milestoneApr 25, 2020
@anntzer
Copy link
Contributor

I wonder whether we should just make the deprecation machinery check the contents ofmessage and, if it doesn't contain%(since)s or%(removal)s, append something like "This deprecation started in mpl %(since)s and will elapse %(removal)s"?

@QuLogic
Copy link
MemberAuthor

I was thinking about that, but it seems like one or two intentionally left it out; maybe we should only do that ifpending=False?

@QuLogicQuLogic added the Release criticalFor bugs that make the library unusable (segfaults, incorrect plots, etc) and major regressions. labelApr 27, 2020
@QuLogic
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Marking as RC, as we shouldn't put out a release without the right numbers, whatever way we decide to do it.

@anntzer
Copy link
Contributor

pending=False explicitly disallows having a scheduled removal, so sure.

Copy link
Member

@tacaswelltacaswell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This can go in as-is or we can wait for the validation.

@QuLogic
Copy link
MemberAuthor

I bumped the dates for the aboveto_rgba_array and#16417.

@tacaswell
Copy link
Member

Going to make an executive decision and merge this.

@tacaswelltacaswell merged commit9575c76 intomatplotlib:masterApr 30, 2020
@QuLogicQuLogic deleted the explicit-deprecations branchApril 30, 2020 19:05
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@tacaswelltacaswelltacaswell approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
MaintenanceRelease criticalFor bugs that make the library unusable (segfaults, incorrect plots, etc) and major regressions.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v3.3.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants
@QuLogic@anntzer@tacaswell
[8]ページ先頭
©2009-2025 Movatter.jp