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

Update 2020-12-27 #1206

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jan 2, 2021
Merged

Update 2020-12-27 #1206

merged 7 commits into from
Jan 2, 2021

Conversation

romainx
Copy link
Collaborator

@romainx romainx commented Dec 29, 2020

The JupyterLab version has been kept in 2.2.x since important changes have been made starting at the version 3.0.0 on the way to manage extensions, see the JupyterLab Changelog. The result is that some of the extensions installed in scipy-notebook are not yet compliant. This issue summarizes in a table the extensions currently compliant with the new version.

The upgrade to JupyterLab 3.0.x is detailed in an issue #1207. However a change has been made in order to prepare this migration #1205 and to help users who want to perform the upgrade by themselves to do so.

The following changes have been made.

  • base-notebook
  • scipy-notebook
    • Changed: Bump dask
    • Changed: Bump ipywidgets
    • Changed: Bump numba
    • Changed: Bump protobuf
    • Changed: Bump scikit-image
    • Changed: Bump scikit-learn
    • Added: A test to perform a check on each extension jupyter labextension check.
  • r-notebook
    • Changed: Bump r-rmarkdown
  • tensorflow-notebook
    • Changed: Bump tensorflow
  • datascience-notebook
    • Changed: Bump r-rmarkdown

@romainx romainx marked this pull request as draft December 29, 2020 17:00
@romainx
Copy link
Collaborator Author

romainx commented Dec 30, 2020

According to the JupyterLab changelog

Extensions can be installed without building JupyterLab with NodeJS
In JupyterLab 3.0, a new recommended way of distributing and installing extensions as Python pip or conda packages is available. Installing such extensions does not require rebuilding JupyterLab and does not require having NodeJS installed. The previous way of distributing extensions as npm packages requiring rebuilding JupyterLab is still available as well. See the documentation for more details.

I'm wondering if we should remove all the old way of installing extensions in scipy-notebook

jupyter nbextension enable --py widgetsnbextension --sys-prefix && \
# Also activate ipywidgets extension for JupyterLab
# Check this URL for most recent compatibilities
# https://github.com/jupyter-widgets/ipywidgets/tree/master/packages/jupyterlab-manager
jupyter labextension install @jupyter-widgets/jupyterlab-manager@^2.0.0 --no-build && \
jupyter labextension install @bokeh/jupyter_bokeh@^2.0.0 --no-build && \
jupyter labextension install jupyter-matplotlib@^0.7.2 --no-build && \
jupyter lab build -y && \
jupyter lab clean -y && \
npm cache clean --force && \

And if we should merge this PR by dropping the support of the extensions that are not working at the moment or if we should wait until their availability ? A compliance table is given here jupyterlab/jupyterlab#9461.

@romainx romainx added the type:Enhancement A proposed enhancement to the docker images label Dec 30, 2020
Waiting for extensions compat
@romainx
Copy link
Collaborator Author

romainx commented Dec 30, 2020

This PR has been modified to rollback to JupyterLab 2.2.x in order to avoid breaking changes regarding extensions for the time being. Its description has been updated, and I think it's ready to merge now. We will perform the move to JupyterLab 3.0.x in a second step.

@romainx romainx requested a review from parente December 30, 2020 15:16
@romainx romainx changed the title [WIP] Update 2020-12-27 Update 2020-12-27 Dec 30, 2020
@romainx romainx marked this pull request as ready for review December 30, 2020 15:16
@romainx romainx marked this pull request as draft December 30, 2020 19:05
@romainx
Copy link
Collaborator Author

romainx commented Dec 30, 2020

Need to check with the last update from @mirekphd in #1205 before merging. Turned back this PR into draft. I will take the time to check it (currently I do not have so much time, I will probably do it next week at the latest).

@romainx romainx removed the request for review from parente December 31, 2020 08:16
@romainx
Copy link
Collaborator Author

romainx commented Jan 2, 2021

Hello, I've verified and added a basic test to check extensions (we will see how it behaves with JupyterLab 3.0.x).
So everything seems OK for me 🚀 .
@parente please could you have a look before the merge?

@romainx romainx requested a review from parente January 2, 2021 08:43
@romainx romainx marked this pull request as ready for review January 2, 2021 09:16
Copy link
Member

@parente parente left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👋 I left one comment about lab 3.0 and one suggestion inline. I'm pro-actively approving so you can merge when you feel it's ready.

Thanks as always for keeping the images fresh and responding to community questions.

base-notebook/Dockerfile Show resolved Hide resolved
base-notebook/Dockerfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@bollwyvl
Copy link

bollwyvl commented Jan 2, 2021 via email

@romainx romainx merged commit 703d8b2 into jupyter:master Jan 2, 2021
@romainx romainx deleted the update_2020-12-27 branch January 2, 2021 19:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type:Enhancement A proposed enhancement to the docker images
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[base-notebook] Cannot connect to server after upgrading to Jupyter Lab 3.0.0
3 participants