-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
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
fix: scipy sparse bug #1166
fix: scipy sparse bug #1166
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1166 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 90.47% 90.47%
=======================================
Files 18 18
Lines 2069 2069
=======================================
Hits 1872 1872
Misses 197 197
|
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.
as you (correctly) pointed out previously, the long-tail of the 5.3 updates in main means this is going to be annoying to release as a patch.
do you think its worth reverting main to 5.2.1 and creating a feature branch now to re-apply all the 5.3 commits since then to a feature branch? cc: @joyceyan
@nayib-jose-gloria, why 5.2.1? Also we can do a 5.2.3 release with the patch and merge that back into main. That should retain all of the 5.3 changes and the 5.2.3 patch. |
@nayib-jose-gloria do you mean reverting main to 5.2.2? i think effort wise the two choices (revert main to 5.2.2 and release this change as 5.2.3 vs release this change as a 5.2.3 patch) seem fairly equivalent to me. i would probably slightly prefer reverting main to 5.2.2 and moving the 5.3 commits to a feature branch since we don't have a timeline set for actually releasing 5.3 yet |
These changes were made in 5.2.3 |
Reason for Change
Changes
Testing