Hacktoberfest 2026：维护者为十月标记出来的 issue，仍然开放、适合新手。 浏览 Hacktoberfest issue

Versioning policy for graphql-python tools

未关闭
  • 哪里不对？
#241 18 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
5/5
预计耗时
一周以上
新手友好度
20/100
Issue 类型
功能
描述清晰度
需要澄清
活跃度
停滞
技术栈
python
领域
backend-api-design, release

调研方向

Issue #241 是一次政策讨论，而不是实现任务，也没有列出任何文件或测试。请审查三个 graphql-core 版本代际、它们的包和版本约束，以及 issue 中列出的依赖工具。达成命名和版本策略的一致意见（包括现有工具和分支应如何继续）即视为完成。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

question

I think it's time to discuss a versioning and naming policy for the graphql-python tools so we can move forward.

We currently have three "generations" of the underlying core library:

  • graphql-core (supports Python 2+3, old API, based on an old version of GraphQL.js)
  • graphql-core-next (supports only Python >= 3.6, new API, latest features from GraphQL.js)
  • graphql-core/modern branch (trys to be compatible with core-next, but support Py 2 + 3)

All of these use the package name "graphql" (like GraphQL.js) which makes things difficult, and currently have version numbers that are not (chrono)logical (core-next has a lower version number than core).

We also have a large set of other libraries that use graphql-core as their foundation: Graphene, graphql-server-core, flask-graphql, graphene-sqlalchemy etc. etc.

We want to move things forward, but not break this whole carefully assembled house of cards or create a proliferation of different forks and subvariants. So we need to talk on how to proceed regarding the versioning and naming strategy.

Some questions that come to my mind:

  • Do we really want to support the graphql-core/modern branch? Yes, it looks like a reasonable strategy and @syrusakbary already put a lot of work into this, but I'm not sure if it's realistic to keep it - to me it seems too much of an effort just for supporting Python 2.7 (end of life 2020-01) and Python 3.5 (end of life 2020-09), and I see nobody who feels responsible and will maintain it. Syrus dropped out, and I want to focus on core-next. And it makes the whole story even more complicated like juggling with three balls. But I'd like to hear the opinion of others, and maybe somebody really wants to maintain it?
  • When the existing tools are rebased on the new API (graphql-core-next), should they be released under a new name (like graphql-server-core-next) or should they keep the name and use a new major version number? Should new repositories be created or just separate branches in the existing repositories?
  • Should we use different names instead of just "graphql" for the base package so that graphql-core and core-next can be installed in parallel?
  • Or should we use the same name, maybe even release them under the same well-known name ("graphql-core") on PyPI and distinguish them by version number ranges (e.g. core = 2.x, core/modern = 3.x, core-next = 4.x+)?
  • Or maybe even choose a completely different distribution name? "GraphQL.py" or "graphql" would be great, but they are already in use.

I'd like to get your thoughts and feedback here or on the Slack channel.

主要语言
Python
星标
371
派生
174
30 天内没有已合并 PR

环境准备

这个项目没有提供开发容器、Dockerfile 或贡献指南，环境需要你自己搭建：先看它的 README，通用步骤见我们的新手贡献指南。

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

graphql-python/graphql-core-legacy 的其他 Issue

查看 graphql-python/graphql-core-legacy 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Python Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。