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

[MNT] fix black doesn't have extras dependency #1697

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 6, 2024
Merged

Conversation

fnhirwa
Copy link
Member

@fnhirwa fnhirwa commented Oct 15, 2024

This PR adds the correct dependency for black jupyter instead of extras as it doesn't have that.

Copy link
Collaborator

@fkiraly fkiraly left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense.

Btw, do we need black still, now that we are using ruff?

@fkiraly fkiraly added the maintenance Continuous integration, unit testing & package distribution label Oct 18, 2024
@fnhirwa
Copy link
Member Author

fnhirwa commented Nov 4, 2024

Makes sense.

Btw, do we need black still, now that we are using ruff?

If we are using ruff we can remove black or depending on @yarnabrina suggestion on linters we might need to add extra linters given that ruff doesn't have some rules implemented.

@yarnabrina
Copy link
Member

I was quite a strong supporter of ruff, but given the limitation of multi file analysis, I'm now quite concerned in general. But it's for the linting component so far, I do not have any opinion for the formatting component.

@fkiraly fkiraly merged commit a884c4d into sktime:main Nov 6, 2024
35 checks passed
@fkiraly fkiraly changed the title [MNT]black doesn't have extras dependency [MNT] fix black doesn't have extras dependency Nov 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
maintenance Continuous integration, unit testing & package distribution
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants