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
gh-93626: Set the release for __future__.annotations
to None
#93628
Conversation
I think your CLA facility is busted, when I sign it, it just says:
|
@pablogsal I've changed the mandatory release to |
@KotlinIsland can you try signing the CLA again? |
|
@KotlinIsland please try again. |
__future__.annotations
to 3.12__future__.annotations
to None
@ambv it worked |
1927446
to
0b37fba
Compare
@graingert This needs to be backported to 3.11 |
@pablogsal This is a critical release blocker for 3.11 |
Doc/whatsnew/3.11.rst
Outdated
@@ -377,6 +377,10 @@ Other Language Changes | |||
coerces negative zero to zero after rounding to the format precision. See | |||
:pep:`682` for more details. (Contributed by John Belmonte in :gh:`90153`.) | |||
|
|||
* :pep:`563` Postponed Evaluation of Annotations, ``__future__.annotations`` has been indefinitely postponed. |
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 don't think this fits here as there's no change.
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.
Personally I rushed to the release page to see the status of pep 563 as in 3.10 it was marked as being released in 3.11. And was surprised to see that there was no mention of it, despite the fact that it has been pulled from 3.11.
I hadn't seen any of the information regarding it's changed status, it would be of value to be to have it in here. Maybe it could be moved to a different section of the release notes? or maybe the full-form changelog?
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.
Perhaps in the "Improved Modules" section it could be listed under __future__
?
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 would suggest something along the lines of a "Non-futures Related to Type Hints" subsection of the "New Features Related to Type Hints" section above. Maybe not that particular name, but I enjoyed coming up with it :)
Lines in our reST docs should be wrapped at 80 columns as noted in the devguide.
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.
Done, I used your suggested name because I didn't understand what you meant by it
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Library/2022-06-09-14-44-21.gh-issue-93626.amongus.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Doc/whatsnew/3.11.rst
Outdated
@@ -377,6 +377,10 @@ Other Language Changes | |||
coerces negative zero to zero after rounding to the format precision. See | |||
:pep:`682` for more details. (Contributed by John Belmonte in :gh:`90153`.) | |||
|
|||
* :pep:`563` Postponed Evaluation of Annotations, ``__future__.annotations`` has been indefinitely postponed. |
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 would suggest something along the lines of a "Non-futures Related to Type Hints" subsection of the "New Features Related to Type Hints" section above. Maybe not that particular name, but I enjoyed coming up with it :)
Lines in our reST docs should be wrapped at 80 columns as noted in the devguide.
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Library/2022-06-09-14-44-21.gh-issue-93626.amongus.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated. Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase |
Changes made, chance to re-review not currently available
Co-authored-by: Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum@gmail.com>
Thanks @KotlinIsland for the PR, and @ambv for merging it |
GH-94553 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.11 branch. |
pythonGH-93628) Co-authored-by: Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 4791a8a) Co-authored-by: KotlinIsland <65446343+KotlinIsland@users.noreply.github.com>
does this make sense backported to 3.10? |
There is no 3.11 whatsnew in 3.10 and it seems to me that the clarified meaning of |
Hi everyone, I noticed that😳 😳 😳 😳 😳 😳 .
__future__.annotations
was turned on in the 3.11 betasThis is highly sus as it should be turned off till further notice
(3.12
)(None
kinda means 'tbd' I think).This is my first cpython contrib, I tried to follow the contributing process, but maybe I missed something, sorry!
This PR also needs to be backported to the 3.11 branch
resolves: #93626
__future__.annotations
has inaccuratemandatoryRelease
value #93626Corresponding typeshed PR python/typeshed#8232