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

Update Notebook, JupyterLab, Jupyter Resource Usage #928

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Aug 9, 2023

Conversation

jtpio
Copy link
Contributor

@jtpio jtpio commented Aug 1, 2023

Update Jupyter Notebook, JupyterLab and Jupyter Resource Usage to the latest major releases:

@jtpio jtpio mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2023
1 task
@consideRatio
Copy link
Member

Thank you @jtpio!

This won't be a breaking change as things aren't automatically upgraded, this is just for new installations anyhow. With that in mind I'm thinking this PR should be merged before ASAP and before 1.0.0 release.

@consideRatio
Copy link
Member

consideRatio commented Aug 1, 2023

I see integration tests are failing because a call to a binary no longer around. But this test will be run with new and old versions of software installed in the user environment, because during an upgrade test we install with the previous version first and then install again with a new version, where the user environment isn't updated.

So fixing this test failure must be done in a way supporting either binary name I think, or skipping it if the new binary isn't available - that is also fine in my mind.

@jtpio
Copy link
Contributor Author

jtpio commented Aug 1, 2023

This won't be a breaking change as things aren't automatically upgraded,

Ah that's good news!

Also this change might need a new release of nbgitpuller with jupyterhub/nbgitpuller#240

@consideRatio
Copy link
Member

@jtpio we could relax this test I think, and just go for jupyterlab and nbgitpuller instead of jupyterlab 4. etc

@consideRatio
Copy link
Member

Also this change might need a new release of nbgitpuller with jupyterhub/nbgitpuller#240

I opened jupyterhub/nbgitpuller#315 about this

@jtpio
Copy link
Contributor Author

jtpio commented Aug 1, 2023

I opened jupyterhub/nbgitpuller#315 about this

Nice thanks!

So fixing this test failure must be done in a way supporting either binary name I think, or skipping it if the new binary isn't available - that is also fine in my mind.

Checking first if the tests pass when using the new jupyter server extension and jupyter labextension list commands. If we don't install notebook==6.* or nbclassic==1.* in the environment then the old jupyter serverextension list should not be available anymore.

Actually even with nbclassic the command would now be jupyter-nbclassic-serverextension: https://nbclassic.readthedocs.io/en/latest/nbclassic_dev_faq.html#noteworthy-updates-in-nbclassic

@jtpio
Copy link
Contributor Author

jtpio commented Aug 1, 2023

Question: should users still be able to access the classic notebook UI? If yes:

@consideRatio
Copy link
Member

Since this is for new installs etc, I suggest we make it not come with more stuff.

I'm prefer seeing tljh install as little as possible though to let the admins decide from a relatively clean slate if they install more things etc. I think for now, lets go with this.

@consideRatio consideRatio merged commit 1a83791 into jupyterhub:main Aug 9, 2023
11 checks passed
@jtpio jtpio deleted the lab4-nb7 branch August 9, 2023 07:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants