Replace cachecontrol with a fork#7997
Conversation
eaad648 to
daa3bba
Compare
|
should be able to remove filelock as a direct dependency too I had also seen this and was holding off on making this pull request until frostming/cacheyou#10 was resolved - though I guess if it's not causing us any problems perhaps it's no big deal |
daa3bba to
1b61610
Compare
Nice, didn't notice the |
1b61610 to
6e5fea9
Compare
|
|
|
Another +1 for considering the migration: I took a look again at #7916 (which was broken and reverted by #7995) and in looks like we could easily reintroduce the performance improvement by using a |
|
psf/cachecontrol#300 contains discussion about moving cachecontrol to a new home. It's hard to tell, from the outside, whether that is active and about to happen: or has stalled in the same way as everything else in that repository. |
|
I am gonna give them some more time. There might be some internal discussion about the topic. |
|
there's a cachecontrol 0.13.0 |
|
Yeah, I will make the changes tonight |
|
So the idea is to stick with |
Yes, since it is now maintained by the PSF and a dedicated team, not only the author. |
|
superseded by #8055 |
|
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
CacheControl package was largely unmaintained and made us haul around a deprecated dependency,
lockfile. Due to recent changes connected tourllib32.0 release, a fork was made and is now maintained by @frostming. This fork merges some long-waiting PRs of cachecontrol, one of them being typing support, so we no longer need to ignore typing errors from that library.