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

kubeflow-pipelines-visualization-server: bump to use Python 3.11 #39639

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 20, 2025

Conversation

sil2100
Copy link
Member

@sil2100 sil2100 commented Jan 15, 2025

Another package that was causing some images to pull in multiple Python bases.

This only bumps the used Python version to 3.11 as this is the max that google-cloud-sdk seems to support for now (see google-cloud-sdk.yaml). This also required bumping some pip dependencies.

Signed-off-by: Łukasz 'sil2100' Zemczak <lukasz.zemczak@chainguard.dev>
@octo-sts octo-sts bot added the bincapz/pass bincapz/pass Bincapz (aka. malcontent) scan didn't detect any CRITICALs on the scanned packages. label Jan 15, 2025
@sil2100 sil2100 requested a review from dannf January 15, 2025 15:48
@sil2100
Copy link
Member Author

sil2100 commented Jan 15, 2025

Also, wanted to bump the tensorflow requirement to what we use, aka. 2.18.0, but actually one of the pip dependencies, I guess that was even tensorflow-data-validation 1.16.1 (latest), claimed it only supported tensorflow <2.17.0. So my bump in the requirements.txt had to be to 2.16.2 instead.

Signed-off-by: Łukasz 'sil2100' Zemczak <lukasz.zemczak@chainguard.dev>
Copy link
Member

@dannf dannf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wow, this one seems like a difficult case - thanks for tackling it!

I'm concerned with diverging from upstream to move to 3.11 support. I wondered why upstream hadn't moved forward, and took a quick look at the project. It seems very active. But where there used to be both 2.3.0 and sdk-2.3.0 tags, there's now been 9 releases of just sdk-* tags (2.4->2.11). I wonder if maybe they have restructured things somewhat, and we're stuck on a dead release.

As for how to validate these changes, the best way I can think of is to build them into the target image and run the image test case.

kubeflow-pipelines-visualization-server.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
kubeflow-pipelines-visualization-server.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: Łukasz 'sil2100' Zemczak <lukasz.zemczak@chainguard.dev>
@sil2100
Copy link
Member Author

sil2100 commented Jan 16, 2025

Let me try building the image against the PR presubmit repo and see if that works as expected.

@sil2100
Copy link
Member Author

sil2100 commented Jan 16, 2025

I'm concerned with diverging from upstream to move to 3.11 support. I wondered why upstream hadn't moved forward, and took a quick look at the project. It seems very active. But where there used to be both 2.3.0 and sdk-2.3.0 tags, there's now been 9 releases of just sdk-* tags (2.4->2.11). I wonder if maybe they have restructured things somewhat, and we're stuck on a dead release.

Regarding this: I don't think we're necessarily 'diverging' from upstream by moving from 3.10 to 3.11. I didn't dig down
too deeply of course, but from all the release notes that I saw, there doesn't seem to be a recommended Python version to use. I think we used 3.10 because it was probably what google-cloud-sdk was using before. The only requirement that pipelines has is for Python to be 3.7 or above.
Did you see any mention of 3.10 being recommended that I missed?

@sil2100 sil2100 enabled auto-merge January 16, 2025 10:17
@sil2100
Copy link
Member Author

sil2100 commented Jan 16, 2025

hm, for unknown reasons I can't get the relevant image to build - both with the old and new package. It just gets stuck on "Creating...". Will investigate.

@sil2100 sil2100 merged commit 7ae6cbd into wolfi-dev:main Jan 20, 2025
10 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bincapz/pass bincapz/pass Bincapz (aka. malcontent) scan didn't detect any CRITICALs on the scanned packages.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants