Skip to content

Conversation

@HonahX
Copy link
Contributor

@HonahX HonahX commented Oct 7, 2025

Rationale for this change

Try to upgrade pydantic to 2.12.0, it may break things due to the upstream regression: pydantic/pydantic#12347

Will file the actual PR if this is case

Are these changes tested?

Are there any user-facing changes?

@HonahX HonahX closed this Oct 7, 2025
kevinjqliu pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2025
)

<!--
Thanks for opening a pull request!
-->

<!-- In the case this PR will resolve an issue, please replace
${GITHUB_ISSUE_ID} below with the actual Github issue id. -->
<!-- Closes #${GITHUB_ISSUE_ID} -->

# Rationale for this change
Closes #2590 

I seem to be faster than the dependabot : ). 

Pin pydantic version to `<2.12.0` to avoid the recent regression:
pydantic/pydantic#12347.

I made this an upper bound because it is unclear about the fix plan in
pydantic community. Once their fix is out, we could release the upper
bound and exclude affected versions only

## Are these changes tested?
No dependency version update. Tested the new version in
#2589 and confirmed the
regression

## Are there any user-facing changes?
No

cc: @Fokko @kevinjqliu 

<!-- In the case of user-facing changes, please add the changelog label.
-->
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.

1 participant