-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 689
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
Deprecate Python 2.7 and Python 3.5 #877
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #877 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 9 9
Lines 1810 1796 -14
Branches 312 313 +1
=========================================
- Hits 1810 1796 -14
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Should be ready for review @systemcatch @krisfremen. All what remains is updating the enfold calls, which @systemcatch is more familiar with. |
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.
Hey @jadchaar just a few comments but otherwise it looks very solid.
The enfold
calls aren't an issue on python 3.6+, I suggest we leave them for a later PR as the users won't see much difference.
return calendar.timegm(self._datetime.utctimetuple()) | ||
return int(self.timestamp()) |
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.
Probably best to stick with old way to guarantee compatibility.
Thanks for the feedback. We had a note to revisit enfold in the copy constructor since we would now be able to just copy the datetime object as is rather than having to enfold again. Do we want to ignore that and just leave it for a future PR? |
Not sure what you mean by copy constructor? |
Oh oops sorry I meant replace: Lines 777 to 823 in 609b630
We probably don't need enfold here anymore since datetime would replace fold natively. Thoughts? |
You're right, how about I make an issue to update the enfold calls after 1.0.0 is released? |
Ref: #878 Want to approve so we can get this merged @systemcatch? |
@isac322 You should be good to now implement type checking off of master! |
Python 2.7 & 3.5 Deprecation Checklist
setup.py
classifiers andpython_requires
to declare arrow only supports Python 3.6+pyupgrade --py36-plus
datetime.timestamp()
MAX_TIMESTAMP
constant withdatetime.max.timestamp()
isinstance(value, numbers.Integral)
toisinstance(value, int)
isstr
function__cmp__()
method in arrow.pyenfold
calls in code @systemcatchBreaking changes for v1.0.0
arrow.py
(requires deprecation warning beforehand)General Changes for v1.0.0
setup.py
Closes: #465
Closes: #861
Closes: #739