Re: [PATCH] docs: sphinx/requirements: Limit jinja2<3.1

From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: sphinx/requirements: Limit jinja2<3.1
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 02:25:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220330022534.10ac0a50@coco.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871qyk7p28.fsf@meer.lwn.net>

Hi Jon,

Em Tue, 29 Mar 2022 09:31:43 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> escreveu:

> Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > jinja2 release 3.1.0 (March 24, 2022) broke Sphinx<4.0.
> > This looks like the result of deprecating Python 3.6.
> > It has been tested against Sphinx 4.3.0 and later later.  
> 
> *Sigh*.  I wish this stuff didn't feel like such a house of cards
> sometimes... 
> 
> > Setting an upper limit of <3.1 to junja2 can unbreak Sphinx<4.0
> > including Sphinx 2.4.4.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
> > Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
> > Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
> > ---
> > Or we can bump the requirement to Sphinx>=4.0.
> > Thoughts?  
> 
> It's probably time to consider a bump there, but that is a bigger one
> than I would want to do at this point. 

Doing a bump at Documentation/sphinx/requirements.txt doesn't mean that people 
using have older versions would need to upgrade, as we don't need to bump the
minimal requirement at Documentation/conf.py, nor the versions suggested by 
scripts/sphinx-pre-install.

So, I don't see a problem on setting it to use sphinx==4.3.2 (or some other 
version).

Yet, I would keep using a known-to-be-good version, instead of letting
pip to just get the latest one.

We need to verify both PDF and html generation, though, as I remember
that some 4.x versions had/(have?) issues with the C domain and duplicate
symbols detection.

Also, it could be worth to check the build time with 2.4.4 and with
whatever newer version we stick.

> So I'll just fast-track this
> patch in; dropping it into the stable updates probably makes sense too.

Agreed.

Thanks,
Mauro