The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20211004072923/https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/20903
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

Use release-branch version scheme #20903

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 16, 2021

Conversation

@ericpre
Copy link
Member

@ericpre ericpre commented Aug 25, 2021

PR Summary

At the time of writing (latest master just installed), the installed and runtime version (from a git repository) are:

>>> import importlib_metadata
>>> importlib_metadata.version('matplotlib')
'3.5.0.dev1801+g298e92f6bf'

and

>>> import matplotlib
>>> matplotlib.__version__
'3.4.2.post1801+g298e92f6bf'

With this PR, the runtime version is:

>>> import matplotlib
>>> matplotlib.__version__
'3.5.0.dev1802+g3593a0c333'

Relevant previous PR on this topic: #18869, #20369,

PR Checklist

  • Has pytest style unit tests (and pytest passes).
  • Is Flake 8 compliant (run flake8 on changed files to check).
  • [N/A] New features are documented, with examples if plot related.
  • [N/A] Documentation is sphinx and numpydoc compliant (the docs should build without error).
  • [N/A] Conforms to Matplotlib style conventions (install flake8-docstrings and run flake8 --docstring-convention=all).
  • [N/A] New features have an entry in doc/users/next_whats_new/ (follow instructions in README.rst there).
  • [N/A] API changes documented in doc/api/next_api_changes/ (follow instructions in README.rst there).
@QuLogic
Copy link
Member

@QuLogic QuLogic commented Aug 26, 2021

I think I was probably waiting for a release with that in before changing it; we should probably ping them about that.

@ericpre
Copy link
Member Author

@ericpre ericpre commented Aug 26, 2021

I think I was probably waiting for a release with that in before changing it; we should probably ping them about that.

Am I understanding correctly that with "ping them" you mean the setuptools_scm developers and the version we get currently is incorrect, because of pypa/setuptools_scm#571: it should be '3.6.0.dev1802+g3593a0c333' instead of '3.5.0.dev1802+g3593a0c333'
If so, it looks to me that this is a different issue, because this PR is about ensuring the installed version and runtime version follows the same scheme and are consistents!

In any case, it is worth pinging them! ;)

Copy link
Contributor

@anntzer anntzer left a comment

This is simply making __init__.py match setup.py.

@ericpre
Copy link
Member Author

@ericpre ericpre commented Sep 13, 2021

This is simply making __init__.py match setup.py.

Yes, this is correct.

If one want to test against some feature which are in the master and use the runtime version to know if the feature is available, then the current runtime version is not useful because unlike the install version defined insetup.py, the runtime version says:

>>> import matplotlib
>>> matplotlib.__version__
'3.4.2.post1954+g20170d7558.d20210913'

As far I understand, this version corresponds to a bug-fix branch and I would expect something along the line of 3.5.0.devXX and 3.6.0.devXX after 3.5.0 is tagged.

Copy link
Member

@QuLogic QuLogic left a comment

They now have a release out with this included.

@QuLogic QuLogic added this to the v3.5.0 milestone Sep 13, 2021
@QuLogic QuLogic added the Build label Sep 13, 2021
@tacaswell tacaswell merged commit ec3966b into matplotlib:master Sep 16, 2021
26 checks passed
meeseeksmachine added a commit to meeseeksmachine/matplotlib that referenced this issue Sep 16, 2021
timhoffm added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 16, 2021
…903-on-v3.5.x

Backport PR #20903 on branch v3.5.x (Use release-branch version scheme )
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants