Skip to content

Conversation

@picnixz
Copy link
Member

@picnixzpicnixz commented Jun 17, 2024

In light of the discussion in #89083, I decided to remove the previous commits on version 7 and 8 and restrict this specific PR to version 6 only. The previous post can be found in the history of this message.

For version 7, please discuss it on #121119.
For version 8, please discuss it on #123224.


📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--120650.org.readthedocs.build/

@picnixz

This comment was marked as resolved.

@picnixzpicnixz changed the title gh-89083: support UUID versions 6, 7, and 8 (RFC 9562)gh-89083: support UUID versions 6, 7 (non-monotonous), and 8 (mt19937-based) (RFC 9562)Jun 22, 2024
@picnixzpicnixz changed the title gh-89083: support UUID versions 6, 7 (non-monotonous), and 8 (mt19937-based) (RFC 9562)gh-89083: support UUID version 6 (RFC 9562)Jun 28, 2024
@picnixzpicnixz changed the title gh-89083: support UUID version 6 (RFC 9562) gh-89083: add ref. impl. for UUID version 6 (RFC 9562) Jun 28, 2024
@merwok
Copy link
Member

I am puzzled by the PR title change – can you explain?

@picnixz
Copy link
MemberAuthor

picnixz commented Jun 28, 2024

Oh yes, after we discussed the v7 implementation, I preferred splitting the PR into 3 with one PR for each version. The ref. impl. means reference implementation but maybe I should have use the expanded wording? (I wanted to have the same title as for the v7 and not a too long title)

@merwok
Copy link
Member

«Reference implementation» makes me think that this code is in support or a spec, and maybe not best-written or optimized for production. If this is not the case, just «implementation» or «support» like before has the right connotations 🙂

Copy link
Member

@vstinnervstinner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@picnixz
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Ideally, I'd like to wait for @hugovk's review as well (for both UUIDv6 and v7 as he also reviewed UUIDv8)

@picnixz
Copy link
MemberAuthor

picnixz commented Feb 23, 2025

I'll hold the merge until we decide on #130461 so that I don't have introduce conflicts in the doc branch.

EDIT: We decided to remove the .. index:: directives in uuid.rst. I'll do the same here.

@merwokmerwok marked this pull request as draft February 23, 2025 18:50
@hugovk
Copy link
Member

I'll hold the merge until we decide on #130461 so that I don't have introduce conflicts in the doc branch.

EDIT: We decided to remove the .. index:: directives in uuid.rst. I'll do the same here.

That issue's PR (#130526) now merged!

@picnixzpicnixz marked this pull request as ready for review February 25, 2025 12:40
@picnixz
Copy link
MemberAuthor

@hugovk I'm not sure why the PR is still marked with an "unresolved review". Is it a bot issue? (maybe re-approving the PR would work?)

@hugovk
Copy link
Member

Yeah, looks like the draft->ready transition triggers the bot to add the awaiting core review label:

image

And the CI check is:

Error: Label error. Requires exactly 1 of: awaiting merge. Found: type-feature, awaiting core review

https://github.com/python/cpython/actions/runs/13521458821/job/37782590646?pr=120650

I'll re-approve.

@picnixz
Copy link
MemberAuthor

I'll merge both UUIDv6 and v7 (#121119) by the end of the week, so that other core devs may have a look if they want. I'll also prepare a nice commit message. It's great we managed to land those before the last alpha. Hopefully it will stay during the beta and rc phases as well!

@picnixzpicnixz self-assigned this Feb 25, 2025
@picnixzpicnixz merged commit 990ad27 into python:mainMar 2, 2025
39 checks passed
@picnixzpicnixz deleted the uuid-rfc-9562 branch March 2, 2025 11:42
@picnixz
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Thank you all for the reviews and the patience!

@hugovk
Copy link
Member

Thank you for the PRs and your patience! 🚀 :)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

type-featureA feature request or enhancement

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants

@picnixz@merwok@hugovk@vstinner@gbdlin@dolfinus@nineteendo