Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33.9k
gh-122085: Use include files for C API deprecations#109843
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
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Conversation
AA-Turner commented Sep 25, 2023 • edited by bedevere-app bot
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited by bedevere-app bot
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
vstinner commented Sep 26, 2023
AA-Turner commented Sep 26, 2023
Personally, I probably wouldn't as I think semantically it makes more sense to note the pending removals for Python APIs within the Deprecated section -- they are a concise list of how quickly readers will need to adapt to the new APIs. A |
vstinner commented Sep 26, 2023
My concern is more that these lists are getting bigger at every Python version. Sometimes, I'm considering to create a sub-page of What's New in Python 3.13, since the document is so big, that people may give up to just start reading it. Deprecation/Removal only interest a minority of people. The whole What's New in Python 3.13 takes 18 pages if I print it as PDF with my default browser configuration. I don't have a strong opinon between:
VERSUS:
I would just prefer to have consistency between the (main) Python section and the C API Changes section. If you prefer to have "Pending Removals ..." under the Deprecations section, please just make it consistent in the doc. |
blaisep left a comment
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.
The text is cleaner than before, thank you.
I can't confirm that the content is correct, I hope this gets merged soon.
hugovk commented May 21, 2024
I agree with this. I want us to have a static page of pending deprecations, so we don't need to worry synchronising across both pages (3.14.rst <-> 3.13.rst <-> 3.12.rst etc.) and branches (main <-> 3.13 <-> 3.12). And we sometimes do forget to update them, for example #118947. Additionally, at some point a branch goes to security-fix only, and we can no longer update the What's New. Then, in "What's New in Python 3.x", we should only list the deprecations newly added in that release. Compare the pytest page: As a user of pytest, this is a useful one-stop page to look where I need to update my code. I copied it for Pillow: As a maintainer of Pillow, this is a useful one-stop page to look for old deprecations to remove in the next release. |
blaisep commented May 21, 2024
(OK, I can see that there is more to this than I originally thought) It seems like the current consensus is to have something like and possibly some |
hugovk commented Jul 1, 2024
Follow on from this. We discussed this on Discourse: And in the docs-community meeting last month, where we thought about using includes: Please see PR #121241 to make a start on this. |
fec9587 to 97193bcCompareAA-Turner commented Jul 27, 2024
With apologies for the force-push, I have hijacked my own PR to use the include-file approach for the C API, whilst still doing the synchronisation. I've split the work into individual commits, which should be somewhat easy to follow. A |
hugovk commented Jul 27, 2024
Is it so that we weren't previously duplicating all the C API deprecations across What's New files? This will mean the What's New pages will become even longer. But I suppose if we do it for the Python deprecations, that's an argument for also doing it for the C API ones too. |
AA-Turner commented Jul 27, 2024 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Almost all of the deprecations were in both 3.12 and 3.13, it was only 3.14 that was sparse, so I think it is worth both ensuring there's consistency and that we advertise the deprecations in all What's New pages. A |
hugovk commented Jul 28, 2024
Would you like to add these includes to the new I also realised we don't want cpython/Doc/deprecations/index.rst Line 4 in b359f66
The backports are correct:
Please could you also remove that line at the same time? |
AA-Turner commented Jul 29, 2024
Done
Done A |
hugovk left a comment
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.
Thanks!
Thanks @AA-Turner for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.12, 3.13. |
Sorry, @AA-Turner, I could not cleanly backport this to |
Sorry, @AA-Turner, I could not cleanly backport this to |
…honGH-109843) (cherry picked from commit 76bdfa4) Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>
GH-122422 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.13 branch. |
…honGH-109843) (cherry picked from commit 76bdfa4) Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>
GH-122423 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.12 branch. |

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--109843.org.readthedocs.build/