Repository navigation
Conversation
|
For my own edification, is there a reason we need to bump the min version? |
|
@jedcunningham We needed 1.34.90 for a feature that was requested, and I did that bump yesterday. This bump from x.90 to x.106 isn't currently mandatory for anything we have at the moment, but there are a lot of API changes there to use (or not). The Bedrock and Sagemaker updates in particular are popular with the current LLM/AI trend. Do you think we should leave this at x.90 until we NEED it? |
|
Generally speaking, yes, we should set the min based on what we actually need from that dep. Of course, constraints can and will have the higher version. |
|
That's why the |
Precisely. We should not just bump the dependency with no reason. There could be good reasons which is something we know (like avoiding a security issue) but generally the |
|
And yes we are doing it alread - merged 2 days ago :) |
potiuk
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So ... requesting changes ... in case there is no real need to do the bump we should not do it.
|
BTW. For botocore specifically, we might have another reason to bump it - due to botocore releasing almost every day, bumping it from time to time to just limit the available number of candidates for resolution algorithm is generally a good idea - becasuse some of the heuristics there might get it into long backtracking. But we will also see that generally in CI and that's when we have ~ 80 or 100 candidates we should worry about it. It's not the case now, and generally when we continue adding operators and features to the provider with |
Follow-up to #40052
I was able to get it a little higher. After a bit more experimentation, this looks like the current practical version cap until aiobotocore does another release.
botocore changelog [here]