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

Drop Python 3.7 support, ensure 3.12 support, update dependencies, and implement asyncio.timeout #422

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 16, 2023

Conversation

cretz
Copy link
Member

@cretz cretz commented Nov 9, 2023

What was changed

  • Drop 3.7 support - removed from wheel name and all CI
  • Ensure 3.12 support - add 3.12 to CI and confirm passing even on non-PR runs
  • Update dependencies - some of which required for 3.12 support
  • Implement asyncio.timeout and other fixed-time timers - required for 3.12 support of asyncio.wait_for since the innards of that method changed from relative time to absolute time (still based on our deterministic loop time)

Will change the required CI jobs soon before/after merge to go from 3.7 + 3.11 to 3.8 + 3.12.

Checklist

  1. Closes [Feature Request] Drop 3.7 support, update CI to Python 3.12, and other build improvements #398

@cretz cretz force-pushed the drop-3.7 branch 15 times, most recently from 3a3bf7e to f1cdb33 Compare November 14, 2023 20:07
@cretz cretz changed the title Remove 3.7 support (and other build/README things) Drop Python 3.7 support, ensure 3.12 support, update dependencies, and implement asyncio.timeout Nov 14, 2023
@cretz cretz marked this pull request as ready for review November 14, 2023 20:29
@cretz cretz requested a review from a team as a code owner November 14, 2023 20:29
Comment on lines +1781 to +1782
# to only add to loop.time() and not an actual fixed point. Due to the
# fact that loop.time() is at a nanosecond level which floats can't
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think something like workflow.time() would be more obvious for users. Loop time seems like a bit on an unintuitive concept.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That already exists. I just use loop.time() in this comment and in some other places when discussing this because that's how asyncio refers to it in their samples.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

OK, cool, I think the README should reference that then rather than loop

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍 Updated

@cretz cretz merged commit 06cfd03 into temporalio:main Nov 16, 2023
12 checks passed
@cretz cretz deleted the drop-3.7 branch November 16, 2023 13:38
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.

[Feature Request] Drop 3.7 support, update CI to Python 3.12, and other build improvements
2 participants