Skip to content
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

Add "pyupgrade" pre-commit hook and auto-format the code accordingly #206

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 8, 2023
Merged

Add "pyupgrade" pre-commit hook and auto-format the code accordingly #206

merged 2 commits into from
Dec 8, 2023

Conversation

alessio-locatelli
Copy link
Collaborator

@alessio-locatelli alessio-locatelli commented Dec 8, 2023

What

As a part of work on #164, I added https://github.com/asottile/pyupgrade with the target Python version defined as 3.8.

I did make unrelated changes (any Python 3.7 leftovers, if any, should removed in a separate PR).

Breaking changes

No.

User guide, contribution guidelines, changelog update

Not required.

HISTROY.md already has a related record: https://github.com/requests-cache/aiohttp-client-cache/blame/main/HISTORY.md#L5


I think that the next step is removing Black, Flake8, Isort, pyupgrade because Ruff re-implemented all of them. Similar to requests-cache/requests-cache@83f7bc7 but in that PR you replaced only Flake8.

@JWCook
Copy link
Member

JWCook commented Dec 8, 2023

I think that the next step is removing Black, Flake8, Isort, pyupgrade because Ruff re-implemented all of them.

Good point. I was holding off on that until ruff's formatter was out of beta, but this post describes it as "production-ready." I'll give it a try!

@JWCook JWCook merged commit cb08e05 into requests-cache:main Dec 8, 2023
5 checks passed
@JWCook JWCook added this to the v0.11 milestone Dec 8, 2023
@JWCook
Copy link
Member

JWCook commented Dec 8, 2023

Whoops, it looks like merging #207 automatically closed this one because #207 included these same commits + revert commits.

@simon-liebehenschel
Copy link

Whoops, it looks like merging #207 automatically closed this one because #207 included these same commits + revert commits.

Wow, sorry I this a mistake on my side. I will tale care of this the next time.

I use GitLab the most of the time.

@JWCook
Copy link
Member

JWCook commented Dec 8, 2023

No problem! I don't think I've seen that before either. I just manually removed the revert commits, so both of these MRs are in main now. Thanks again for the help!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants