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

Relax compat requirements #218

Closed
mestinso opened this issue Feb 27, 2024 · 4 comments
Closed

Relax compat requirements #218

mestinso opened this issue Feb 27, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@mestinso
Copy link

Some of the current package compat requirements are somewhat restrictive and are causing some surprising package results. These are the main pkg requirements that i'm referring to that I think could be relaxed:

  • DifferentialEquations (FMI.jl): Relax from "7.7-7.12" to "7.7"?
  • ProgressMeter (FMI.jl): Relax from "1.7-1.9" to "1.7"?
  • ChainRulesCore (FMICore.jl): Relax from "1.16-1.18" to "1.16"?

In a fresh environment, if I "] add FMI", the following packages get installed (this is on julia 1.10.1):
FMI.jl = 0.16.4 (latest)
FMIImport.jl = 0.16.3 (not the latest)
FMICore.jl = 0.19.1 (not the latest)

The issue appears to be the new compat requirement here (capping ChainRulesCore to 1.18):
ThummeTo/FMICore.jl@4e53a05

Since DifferentialEquations also depends on ChainRulesCore, Pkg decides to downgrade FMIImport and FMICore to earlier where that compat requirement wasn't present and then it ends up installing version 1.22 of ChainRulesCore. So if FMI really depends on 1.16-1.18, this new restriction ended up backfiring and Pkg found a way to install it anyways...

@ThummeTo
Copy link
Owner

Allowing for any new (possible) breaking release led to some bad crashes in the past for FMI.jl, so I wouldn't do that. However in FMICore it seems ok. So I think the proper way would be to allow for ChainRulesCore 1.16+ in FMICore.

@ThummeTo
Copy link
Owner

This is fixed with FMICore v0.20.1

@mestinso
Copy link
Author

@ThummeTo Didn't want to open a full additional issue here, but what about ProgressMeter compatibility requirements? Seems like a relatively low risk one to relax as well. Thoughts?

@ThummeTo
Copy link
Owner

Relaxing compats for ProgressMeter seems ok for me 👍
Big update is coming in anyway, so I will implement it there

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants