Add upper bounds to FFTW and DSP Compats #5778
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
This is another attempt at JuliaRegistries#5230, which was an attempt at fixing the breakage caused by JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#26 (e.g. JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#320, JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#323, JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#324). The underlying problem is that JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#26 moved functions from DSP.jl to AbstractFFTs.jl, requiring users to have versions of both of those packages either before that change or after it. Because FFTW reexports AbstractFFTWs, users also have to coordinate versions of DSP.jl and FFTW.jl. This problem was fixed for the most recent versions of DSP.jl and FFTW.jl (v0.6.1 and v1.1, respectively) by JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#322 and JuliaMath/FFTW.jl#124. However, because earlier versions of FFTW do not have an upper bound for its dependency on AbstractFFTs, and neither does DSP, Pkg cannot currently tell that some combinations of versions for AsbtractFFTs and DSP.jl are incompatible, which is causing users to experience issues even after the problem was fixed for the most recent versions (JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#323, JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#324). Fixing the problem is made slightly more complicated because DSP does not explicitly depend on AbstractFFTs, but instead DSP implicitly depends on AbstractFFTs through FFTW's reexport of it, and in turn DSP explicitly depends on FFTW. To fix this problem, I have changed the Compat.toml for FFTW to place a upper bound on AbstractFFTs, so that packages get a consistent interface when using FFTW. I have also changed the Compat.toml for DSP, to avoid breakage caused by AbstractFFTs v0.5 taking some functions that were previously defined in DSP. In addition, the Compat.toml for DSP showed versions before 0.5.1 to be compatible with Julia 1, which was inaccurate. I have therefore changed this TOML table to restrict the DSP versions to the range that is compatible with Julia 1. I have tested that these changes work for the most recent versions of DSP and FFTW, as well as older versions.
|
@ararslan and @stevengj might be able to double check the accuracy of the FFTW bounds, and @ararslan @martinholters and @ssfrr might be able to double check the accuracy of the DSP bounds. |
ararslan
approved these changes
Nov 23, 2019
|
My pleasure! It will be nice to have these packages working for most users. |
This was referenced Nov 25, 2019
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.
This is another attempt at #5230, which itself was an attempt at fixing the breakage
caused by JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#26 (e.g. JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#320,
JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#323, JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#324). The underlying problem is that
JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#26 moved functions from DSP.jl to AbstractFFTs.jl,
requiring users to have versions of both of those packages either before that
change or after it. Because FFTW reexports AbstractFFTs, users also have to
coordinate versions of DSP.jl and FFTW.jl.
This problem was fixed for the most recent versions of DSP.jl and
FFTW.jl (v0.6.1 and v1.1, respectively) by JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#322 and
JuliaMath/FFTW.jl#124. However, because earlier versions of FFTW do not have an
upper bound for its dependency on AbstractFFTs, and neither does DSP, Pkg cannot
currently tell that some combinations of versions for AsbtractFFTs and DSP.jl
are incompatible, which is causing users to experience issues even after the
problem was fixed for the most recent versions (JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#323,
JuliaDSP/DSP.jl#324).
Fixing the problem is made slightly more complicated because DSP does not
explicitly depend on AbstractFFTs, but instead DSP implicitly depends on
AbstractFFTs through FFTW's reexport of it, and in turn DSP explicitly depends
on FFTW.
To fix this problem, I have changed the Compat.toml for FFTW to place a upper
bound on AbstractFFTs, so that packages get a consistent interface when using
FFTW. I have also changed the Compat.toml for DSP, to avoid breakage caused by
AbstractFFTs v0.5 taking some functions that were previously defined in DSP.
In addition, the Compat.toml for DSP showed versions before 0.5.1 to be
compatible with Julia 1, which was inaccurate. I have therefore changed this
TOML table to restrict the DSP versions to the range that is compatible with
Julia 1.
I have tested that these changes work for the most recent versions of DSP and
FFTW, as well as older versions.