Repository navigation
Allow newer versions of zarr package - #1968
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1968 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.82% 90.88% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 92 92
Lines 14190 14190
==========================================
+ Hits 12888 12897 +9
+ Misses 1302 1293 -9
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
yarikoptic
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
to act in clear consciousness requires review of why we had that ceiling to start with and add that to PR description. I recall that there were dances in similar "let's just change it" cases which had ramifications. May be the comment above should reflect that ceiling!
|
As I recall the more meaningful piece was always numcodecs (which caused more of the issues historically), not the zarr upper bound itself Should we just relax to accept w/e loose upper bound? 🤖 AI below 🤖 The risk is low and the green CI is meaningful. Where the ceiling came fromThere was never a known zarr breakage behind the ceiling. Each time, it was set to whatever zarr release was newest when the PR was opened:
🤖 Generated with Claude Code |
That is how we typically ceil if `~=` can't be used as spanning multiple majors etc
yarikoptic
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If no side effects from my pushed ceiling - can be merged
edit by @yarikoptic: see #1968 (comment) below