A5rocks
> Same issue here on > > ``` > trio==0.26.2 > trio-websocket==0.11.1 > Python 3.12.4 > ``` @danpe Cause this isn't exactly using `httpx`, I'm confused on why you're using...
That seems very likely! https://github.com/python-trio/trio/pull/3051 is another PR that hit this just in case it helps.
Once again ran into the bad cache for CI jobs thing. I really wonder what could be causing it; seems to be some `pip` thing?
I agree with @TeamSpen210 that this doesn't really help anything. It doesn't make things clearer (unlike `flake8-commas`) and removes semantics. Looking through the error codes listed on (I'm sure `ruff`...
Rereading https://github.com/python-trio/trio/issues/279, now I get why the original PR has the atomic replace. I believe what this PR does is fine, because no atomic replace -> atomic replace is not...
Done though you can always just make a PR regardless!
Given we have 100% coverage now :tm:, we could actually ditch codecov once and for all. But requiring 100% coverage on every PR is a bit much. So IMO no....
Should we reenable strict errors, or is this issue already done?
I don't think we should track strict errors here. I also think they don't serve much of a purpose. There's two scenarios: - codecov fails uploads a lot. We want...
Just for tracking reasons: I enabled strict errors in https://github.com/python-trio/trio/pull/3312 because there was an in-code TODO about doing this when updating codecov. If we hit many errors, we can back...