Hi Diane, Diane Trout, on 2024-06-14: > On Fri, 2024-06-14 at 23:16 +0200, Étienne Mollier wrote: > > Hi Diane, Hi Julian > > > > I'm wrapping up that email as it seems to me there could be some > > activity on the dask package from several people at once. > > > Yeah I saw that and decided I was overloaded and stopped doing > anything. > > Historically it was pretty important to dask and dask.distributed to be > released together, upstream intends them to be matching versions, but I > didn't know how to set the the dependnecy version strings to require > that.
It makes sense. The construction pretty much looks like the latter is supposed to be a Python submodule of the former. > > I happen to have a look at the dask.dataframe import issues, > > which manifest as at least #1068422, #1069821, and #1069359. > > The import problem looks fixed in 2024.5.2, but the new version > > also introduced a couple of issues: > > > > * the following change[1] is needed to fix a test failure[2]. > > > > [1]: https://github.com/dask/dask/pull/11177 > > [2]: https://github.com/dask/dask/issues/11176 > > > > * dask.distributed failed its supposedly flaky autopkgtest > > with an error which suggests the two packages might have to > > be uploaded in a lockstep: > > Yes very much yes. Is there a way to nag anyone trying to upload dask > to go check the harder to update distributed before uploading? A mention about the interdependency in d/README.source may help, but getting dask.distributed autopkgtest to not be flaky anymore would prevent migration of a mismatched distribution to testing, and raise some alarms in the maneuver; that is, assuming version mismatch is going to cause test failures in dask.distributed in every cases. > > If that helps, I have the package upgrade staging on my drive, > > and may push to salsa after a good night of sleep. In case you > > see reasons I missed for not bumping version too soon, or if you > > already went through the upgrade steps already, don't hesitate > > to tell me to hold my horses. > > That all seems promising to me. > > > > > I did not focus a lot on the sphinxdoc issue described in the > > newly opened #1073183. I'm not very good with dealing with > > sphinxdoc, and would be more tempted to copy the bare rst files > > than getting the html files back on tracks. > > > > If you want to push what you've done I might have time sunday night/ > monday to look at the sphinx problem. Okay, I pushed my work in progress on Salsa, so anyone can build on top of it. In the meantime I can change target and see to move dask.distributed forward. > Dask is probably complicated enough to be a good candidate for team > maintenance. > > Diane Thank you for your time putting the additional context! Have a nice day, :) -- .''`. Étienne Mollier <emoll...@debian.org> : :' : pgp: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c 8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da `. `' sent from /dev/pts/3, please excuse my verbosity `-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
