Drop python 3.8 support #12875
Drop python 3.8 support #12875
Conversation
testing/code/test_excinfo.py
Outdated
| if upframe.f_code.co_name == "_makepath": | ||
| # Only raise with expected calls, but not via e.g. inspect for | ||
| # py38-windows. | ||
| # py38-windows. (?) | ||
| raised += 1 | ||
| raise OSError(2, "custom_oserror") | ||
| return orig_path_cwd() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure what to do here, advise welcome
There was a problem hiding this comment.
#6529 does not offer any explanation, however #6463 (comment) links it and implies that there might've been flakiness in the Codecov uploader. But this was like almost 5 years ago, and Codecov has since rewritten their uploader 3 times. We've additionally made it less flaky by hardcoding a plain-text token a few months ago.
Looking into the coverage reports, something weird is happening. The if-line is marked as covered partially, both in this PR and on main:
- https://app.codecov.io/gh/pytest-dev/pytest/pull/12875/blob/testing/code/test_excinfo.py#L966
- https://app.codecov.io/gh/pytest-dev/pytest/blob/main/testing%2Fcode%2Ftest_excinfo.py#L966
However, the return line is reported as 100% covered in the PR (https://app.codecov.io/gh/pytest-dev/pytest/pull/12875/blob/testing/code/test_excinfo.py#L971) while on main it's marked as not covered (https://app.codecov.io/gh/pytest-dev/pytest/blob/main/testing%2Fcode%2Ftest_excinfo.py#L966).
AFAIU, the raise instruction can only be reached on if True and the return statement would be reachable on if False. That should cover both branches of the if-block. So I don't understand why the conditional is marked with partial coverage.
_makepath() is also fully covered in both cases:
- https://app.codecov.io/gh/pytest-dev/pytest/pull/12875/blob/src/_pytest/_code/code.py#L955
- https://app.codecov.io/gh/pytest-dev/pytest/blob/main/src%2F_pytest%2F_code%2Fcode.py#L958
P.S. While looking into Codecov, I realized that it does not show any coverage for src/pytest/ — it's just not there. It looks like we also have Coveragepy misconfigured or something. Something to investigate.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I investigated a little, it was introduced in 79ae86c so that this function did not raise accidentally when inspecting on some env. So this is still useful as it's not only applicable for windows py38.
psf-chronographer
bot
added
the
bot:chronographer:provided
|
Changed the configuration of the repo so |
Pierre-Sassoulas
force-pushed
the
drop-python3.8
branch
from
14b36ce
to
3f03eda
Compare
Pierre-Sassoulas
changed the title
Pierre-Sassoulas
force-pushed
the
drop-python3.8
branch
6 times, most recently
from
c792deb
to
3dd3871
Compare
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Pierre-Sassoulas
force-pushed
the
drop-python3.8
branch
from
3dd3871
to
62da60e
Compare
(With "unexpected value ''")
|
This is ready for review. I have no idea why I need fe1f3f7 (or why it fixes the issue) but otherwise we get a: (See the commit before the last one's pipeline : https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/actions/runs/11775505463). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Strange, all jobs are installing Python 3.9 and using that. For example, this is the windows-py312 job:
https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/actions/runs/11775818422/job/32797006395?pr=12875
It is clearly installing Python 3.9 ("Set up Python 3.9") and we can see that also in the test suite:
============================= test session starts ==============================
platform linux -- Python 3.9.20, pytest-8.4.0.dev153+gbedb1aecd, pluggy-1.5.0
From what I can tell all jobs are like that.
| "windows-py39", | ||
| names: [ | ||
| "windows-py39-unittestextras", | ||
| "windows-py39-pluggy", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some problems:
windows-py39is used in theincludesection but is missing innamesubuntu-py39is declared innamesbut not used ininclude
From my understanding we should use name here, as this is the variable we want to match in include -- perhaps the problems happening before were due because of the mismatches above.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for looking into it, nice catch !
Co-authored-by: Bruno Oliveira <[email protected]>
This reverts commit fe1f3f7.
|
Fixing your other comment and reverting the bad fix, worked: |
Closes #12874