Backport of PR 12686 on v2.2.x#12698
Conversation
|
Master has moved far enough away from the 2.2.x branch is is probably better to backport the tests as well. |
tacaswell
left a comment
tacaswell
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am 50/50 on backporting the tests. Defer to a second reviewer.
|
This may be a bit naive, but I'd say one should always backport the tests. Even with tests it's still possible to break things unconsciously, but at least it ensures not to break the very feature that is added. If this gets backported to 2.2 then #12673 should as well, right? |
|
Oh, good catch @ImportanceOfBeingErnest ! I miss-read things, I am -0.5 on backporting these PRs as they are not critical bugs in 2.2.x |
tacaswell
dismissed
their stale review
Misread the PR, thought this was fixing an existing issue with the collections.abc imports (which will eventually become an import failure).
|
Fine with not backporting. |
4 participants
PR Summary
Backports of #12686 and #12431.
Note: I only backport the code of #12431, not the tests and test images. But I assume that's ok as changes are made against master and tested there.