This repository was archived by the owner on Apr 27, 2026. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 191
chore(deps): bump upper python requirement to 3.13 #1814
Merged
+4
−4
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#1814 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It feels overkill to me, not sure there's much added value...
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the linked thread we already see a possible regression stemming from the twisted upgrade only arising in 3.12 but not 3.13, no? Detecting such situations before merge and release doesn't seem like overkill as long as 3.12 is supported.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@3nprob, afaict the failing test you are referring too is know to be flaky. i had written a potential structural fix in #1565
bottom line, extending test matrix would not bring much imo
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is actually unrelated and different?
Ie, what I believe is an example of the flakiness you mention: https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket-clientserver/actions/runs/18870804891/job/53848480732
I've also anecdotally seen spurious timeout and some
AssertionError 0 === 1happen locally.Different failing unit and errors (afaict the unexpected
200status code there have not been seen otherwise?). The failures I mention can also occur earlier than 120s in, vs the ones mentioned in #1565. I've gone as far back in JM CI runs as logs are retained and can not see it happening historically.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
right, i went too quick in conclusion, this is likely unrelated
i've seen these ones too from time to time, much less, or not, with 3.13 as far as i recall.
bottom line, flaky tests should be identified locally and addressed structurally, i'm not in favor of "fat" ci runs to capture flakiness
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm against increasing matrix too much here. Actually, when I proposed originally to have tests with both two Python and two Bitcoin Core versions, there was some opposition even against that. In any case, this discussion is out of scope of this PR.