Require Julia v1.10+ #731
Require Julia v1.10+ #731
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #731 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 89.33% 89.58% +0.24%
==========================================
Files 11 11
Lines 1013 1008 -5
==========================================
- Hits 905 903 -2
+ Misses 108 105 -3 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
StaticArrays is only a regular dependency on Julia < 1.9, on Julia >= 1.9 it is only a weak dependency. |
|
Maybe it's ideal to do this at 1.1? Then in case anyone still wants 1.6, there will be a 1.0 release they can install. I wouldn't put much work into supporting 1.6 now, but delaying slightly is easy. |
|
I can’t imagine anyone cares either way. Any Julia v1.6 users can still use ForwardDiff v0.x, if they are happy with old versions of Julia they are surely happy with old versions of ForwardDiff the only point is to maintain developer sanity. Why support old versions for fictional users that probably don’t exist? Who is on Julia v1,6 but is upset about being on ForwardDiff v0.8??? Literally no one! So why not just drop support and we can all move on with our lives. |
|
My fictitious user is someone trying to update bounds so that their CI works! Not creating tighter coupling than we have to seems polite, when it's really easy. Agree real end-use isn't the issue. |
|
Yes I agree that’s a serious problem. Often trying to use outdated code fails even with manifests because it can figure out the right versionszzz But I think that’s a Julia Pkg problem… |
|
@mcabbott I fixed the merge conflicts in the GHA workflow and the allocation tests, and made a minor update to the docs - this should be an easy re-review 🙂 |
I think with v1.0 it makes sense to drop the support for earlier versions of Julia before the LTS. The benefits are: