version.text replaces pretty_version#549
Merged
radoering merged 2 commits intopython-poetry:mainfrom Jan 22, 2023
Merged
Conversation
192f487 to
11a3518
Compare
d589e85 to
d207872
Compare
Member
I'd prefer this route and appreciate if you can do as proposed. |
d207872 to
c86340e
Compare
08f8f81 to
a4064ad
Compare
radoering
reviewed
Jan 22, 2023
6bd42e3 to
56bbd6b
Compare
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
Member
|
Looks like the deprecation revealed further usage. 😄 |
radoering
approved these changes
Jan 22, 2023
Merged
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.








Companion to python-poetry/poetry#7305
Downstream tests should fail until python-poetry/poetry#7305 propagates
I suppose the
Packagecould instead continue to accept the pretty_version in its constructor but just ignore it: while that would be backwards-compatible it would also be rather misleading.I don't think it's worth it myself - but if you really wanted to go through the deprecation cycle I suppose we could check for not-None pretty_version and warn