Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 17, 2023. It is now read-only.

[v1.x] Port #20940 (Upgrade numpy to <1.20.0) from v1.9.x #20955

Merged
DickJC123 merged 2 commits into from
Mar 18, 2022
Merged

[v1.x] Port #20940 (Upgrade numpy to <1.20.0) from v1.9.x #20955

DickJC123 merged 2 commits into from
Mar 18, 2022

Conversation

@DickJC123
Copy link
Contributor

@DickJC123 DickJC123 commented Mar 12, 2022

Description

Advances numpy past vulnerabilities. See description under #20940

Checklist

Essentials

  • PR's title starts with a category (e.g. [BUGFIX], [MODEL], [TUTORIAL], [FEATURE], [DOC], etc)
  • Changes are complete (i.e. I finished coding on this PR)
  • All changes have test coverage
  • Code is well-documented

Changes

  • Feature1, tests, (and when applicable, API doc)
  • Feature2, tests, (and when applicable, API doc)

Comments

  • If this change is a backward incompatible change, why must this change be made.
  • Interesting edge cases to note here

@DickJC123
[v1.9.x] [BUGFIX] Upgrade numpy to <1.20.0 to avoid security vulnerab…
042a74f 
…ilities affecting numpy<1.19.1 (apache#20940)

* Pin numpy==1.19.1 to demonstrate issues

* Relax min numpy version

* Make test_np_array_function_protocol delete() testing work with numpy>=1.19

* Fix test_np_delete to also work with numpy>=1.19

* Pip install python module 'packaging'

* More pip-install 'packaging'

* Update windows requirements.txt

* Allow numpy as advanced as 1.19.5
@DickJC123 DickJC123 requested a review from szha March 12, 2022 01:27
@josephevans josephevans changed the title [v1.x] Port #20940 (Upgrade numpy to <1.20.0 ...) from v1.9.x [v1.x] Port #20940 (Upgrade numpy to <1.20.0) from v1.9.x Mar 14, 2022
@mseth10 mseth10 added pr-awaiting-testing PR is reviewed and waiting CI build and test pr-work-in-progress PR is still work in progress pr-awaiting-review PR is waiting for code review and removed pr-awaiting-testing PR is reviewed and waiting CI build and test pr-work-in-progress PR is still work in progress labels Mar 14, 2022
@DickJC123
Copy link
Contributor Author

DickJC123 commented Mar 15, 2022

Nothing new here w.r.t. the original PR to v1.9.x. An easy review @szha?

@mseth10 mseth10 added pr-awaiting-testing PR is reviewed and waiting CI build and test and removed pr-awaiting-review PR is waiting for code review labels Mar 16, 2022
@mseth10 mseth10 added pr-work-in-progress PR is still work in progress pr-awaiting-testing PR is reviewed and waiting CI build and test and removed pr-awaiting-testing PR is reviewed and waiting CI build and test pr-work-in-progress PR is still work in progress labels Mar 18, 2022
@mseth10 mseth10 added pr-work-in-progress PR is still work in progress pr-awaiting-testing PR is reviewed and waiting CI build and test pr-awaiting-review PR is waiting for code review and removed pr-work-in-progress PR is still work in progress pr-awaiting-testing PR is reviewed and waiting CI build and test labels Mar 18, 2022
samskalicky
samskalicky approved these changes Mar 18, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@samskalicky samskalicky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@DickJC123 DickJC123 merged commit 269daba into apache:v1.x Mar 18, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@szha szha Awaiting requested review from szha

@marcoabreu marcoabreu Awaiting requested review from marcoabreu marcoabreu is a code owner

@aaronmarkham aaronmarkham Awaiting requested review from aaronmarkham aaronmarkham is a code owner

2 more reviewers

@samskalicky samskalicky samskalicky approved these changes

@josephevans josephevans josephevans approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

pr-awaiting-review PR is waiting for code review

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@DickJC123 @samskalicky @josephevans @mseth10