chore(kfp): bump to python 3.9 by davidspek · Pull Request #2078 · GoogleCloudPlatform/oss-test-infra

davidspek · 2023-09-22T09:49:18Z

This PR updates the default python version used by Kubeflow Pipelines to 3.9 since 3.7 is now EOL and causing conflicts with dependencies (such as ml-metadata). This should solve the recent test failures on the master branch.

/cc @chensun @zijianjoy @connor-mccarthy

Signed-off-by: David van der Spek <vanderspek.david@gmail.com>

google-oss-prow · 2023-09-22T09:49:30Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: DavidSpek
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign chensun for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

prow/prowjobs/kubeflow/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

google-oss-prow · 2023-09-22T09:49:37Z

Hi @davidspek. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a GoogleCloudPlatform member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

connor-mccarthy · 2023-09-22T15:58:23Z

    spec:
      containers:
-      - image: python:3.7
+      - image: python:3.9


In places where we are testing potential user code paths, I think it still makes sense to test this on the lowest (least feature-rich) version of Python supported by the KFP SDK: Python 3.7. This is the most aggressive form of testing.

Practically speaking, this applies for every presubmit that invokes KFP SDK code.

Would you mind pushing a commit to my branch here that has the changes you have in mind. You're obviously much more aware of the current testing setup and which things should change and which ones shouldn't. You should be able to push to my branch since I have allowed maintainers t commit to it.

Hey, David. I added comments throughout for where I think we should not bump to Python 3.9 and cc'd others where I do not have enough information to say. To unblock yourself, I recommend ignoring the places where we are waiting on input from others. We can always come back to them.

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:45:33Z

    spec:
      containers:
-      - image: python:3.7
+      - image: python:3.9


I think we should leave this as python:3.7 since it is a test.

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:45:39Z

      containers:
      # run on the lowest version of Python (with the least features) for most aggressive testing
-      - image: python:3.7
+      - image: python:3.9


I think we should leave this as python:3.7 since it is a test.

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:45:44Z

    spec:
      containers:
-      - image: python:3.7
+      - image: python:3.9


I think we should leave this as python:3.7 since it is a test.

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:46:22Z

    spec:
      containers:
-      - image: python:3.7
+      - image: python:3.9


cc @chensun for whether this is safe to bump to python:3.9

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:46:44Z

    spec:
      containers:
-      - image: python:3.7
+      - image: python:3.9


I think we should leave this as python:3.7 since it is a test.

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:47:08Z

    spec:
      containers:
-      - image: python:3.8
+      - image: python:3.9


cc @chensun for whether this is safe to bump to python:3.9

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:48:15Z

    spec:
      containers:
-      - image: python:3.7
+      - image: python:3.9


Hey, David. I added comments throughout for where I think we should not bump to Python 3.9 and cc'd others where I do not have enough information to say. To unblock yourself, I recommend ignoring the places where we are waiting on input from others. We can always come back to them.

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:50:04Z

    spec:
      containers:
-      - image: python:3.7
+      - image: python:3.9


cc @chensun for whether this is safe to bump to python:3.9

connor-mccarthy · 2023-10-05T22:50:14Z

  spec:
    containers:
-      - image: python:3.7-slim
+      - image: python:3.9-slim


cc @chensun for whether this is safe to bump to python:3.9

chore(kfp): bump to python 3.9

fed6cda

Signed-off-by: David van der Spek <vanderspek.david@gmail.com>

google-oss-prow Bot requested review from chensun, connor-mccarthy and zijianjoy September 22, 2023 09:49

google-oss-prow Bot added the size/M label Sep 22, 2023

google-oss-prow Bot added the needs-ok-to-test label Sep 22, 2023

connor-mccarthy suggested changes Sep 22, 2023

View reviewed changes

google-oss-prow Bot assigned connor-mccarthy Sep 22, 2023

connor-mccarthy suggested changes Oct 11, 2023

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Conversation

davidspek commented Sep 22, 2023

Uh oh!

google-oss-prow Bot commented Sep 22, 2023

Uh oh!

google-oss-prow Bot commented Sep 22, 2023

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants