Eric Hanson

I think Julia v1.10 and 1.11 use v0.4, Julia v1.12 uses v1, and Julia v1.13 uses v2 (looking at https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/master/deps/JuliaSyntax.version). So we would need to simultaneously support 3 breaking versions...

yeah, fair, we could probably support a few or at least not load the vendored one when we are compatible. PRs accepted. I think I got kind of annoyed working...

I'd say to drop 1.6 and just require 1.10. I don't think there's any need to run on old Julia's for this package.

I also think we should make the tests more stable if possible, but dropping 1.6 is quicker and seems harmless

Personally I think doing a breaking release whenever there's a new check is alright, and just have all checks opt-out by default. I'm not an Aqua maintainer, but I've used...

closed by https://github.com/JuliaLang/JuliaSyntax.jl/pull/571

JuMP/MOI can do reformulations without an issue, the tricky bit is that these reformulations are only valid when the problem is DCP, see https://jump.dev/Convex.jl/stable/introduction/dcp/#An-invalid-formulation for a quick example of why....

https://github.com/conda/conda-lock might be helpful (I haven’t tried it though)

This is my bad ad-hoc implementation of lowering/scoping; hoping switching to JuliaLowering for scope resolution can fix this. (Or maybe we can improve the existing implementation)

this is the same as #129 in retrospect; I didn't realize it was a regression until that issue