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

add support for polars 1 #73

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

add support for polars 1 #73

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

pavelzw
Copy link
Member

@pavelzw pavelzw commented Jul 7, 2024

No description provided.

@pavelzw pavelzw requested a review from 0xbe7a as a code owner July 7, 2024 12:57
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 7, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 98.10%. Comparing base (eb0fb04) to head (31da7c8).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #73   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.10%   98.10%           
=======================================
  Files           2        2           
  Lines         211      211           
=======================================
  Hits          207      207           
  Misses          4        4           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ platforms = ["linux-64", "osx-arm64", "osx-64", "win-64"]

[dependencies]
python = ">=3.9"
polars = ">=0.14.24,<0.21"
polars = ">=0.14.24,<2"
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 we should pin to <1.1

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

shouldn't the next breaking change be polars 2? since we are not touching polars internals but only the public api, this should be fine imo. but if you have strong opinions on this, we can also pin to <1.1

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

They might add unsupported syntax without bumping the major version. Let's keep a rather tight pin to 1.1 or 1.2 here

@pavelzw pavelzw added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants