Skip to content

Drop support for Python 3.8 #7628

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 11, 2025
Merged

Drop support for Python 3.8 #7628

merged 2 commits into from
Apr 11, 2025

Conversation

honnix
Copy link
Contributor

@honnix honnix commented Apr 11, 2025

Python 3.8 is no longer supported by notebook, so this lower bound needs to be changed.

$ pip3.8 index versions notebook
WARNING: pip index is currently an experimental command. It may be removed/changed in a future release without prior warning.
notebook (7.4.0)

Copy link
Contributor

Binder 👈 Launch a Binder on branch honnix/notebook/patch-1

@honnix
Copy link
Contributor Author

honnix commented Apr 11, 2025

I'm not sure how CI is set up, so this change might make some of the checks start using Python3.9, which could be the reason of notebook/app.py:42:9: UP006 Use dictinstead oft.Dict for type annotation. It might be a massive fix to move to dict, list, etc., so maybe the linter could be configured to ignore this.

@jtpio
Copy link
Member

jtpio commented Apr 11, 2025

Thanks @honnix for looking into this.

It's probably because of ruff which now uses 3.9 as the base version. Would you be able to try running the ruff linter to check if it's able to auto-fix these?

@jtpio jtpio added this to the 7.5.0 milestone Apr 11, 2025
@honnix
Copy link
Contributor Author

honnix commented Apr 11, 2025

Would you be able to try running the ruff linter to check if it's able to auto-fix these?

Hi @jtpio . Thank you for the quick reply. I changed ruff config to ignore UP006 in this PR. I think it definitely makes sense to fix everything (hopefully ruff fix do that automatically), but I'm not sure it should be in this PR. I guess having a dedicated PR to fix that might be better, assuming it's gonna be a big change.

@honnix
Copy link
Contributor Author

honnix commented Apr 11, 2025

This is now good to go. I can follow this up fixing stuff using ruff.

Copy link
Member

@jtpio jtpio left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

Makes sense to fix some of the ruff rules in a follow-up PRs. Maybe some of them are not needed anymore?

@jtpio jtpio merged commit 2616caa into jupyter:main Apr 11, 2025
31 checks passed
@honnix honnix deleted the patch-1 branch April 11, 2025 12:46
@honnix
Copy link
Contributor Author

honnix commented Apr 11, 2025

Maybe some of them are not needed anymore?

That I don't know. I'm not familiar with the code base at all.

@honnix honnix mentioned this pull request Apr 14, 2025
@jtpio jtpio changed the title fix: Update lower bound of required python to 3.9 Drop support for Python 3.8 Apr 14, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants