📦 Cap Cython under Python 3.12+ below v3.1

[ajsanchezsanz]

What do these changes do?

Use latest Cython stable version, avoiding using pre-release versions.
Why? There is some issue with Cython 3.1.0a1 that is making the tests to fail.

Are there changes in behavior for the user?

No

Related issue number

Fixes #1411

Checklist

• I think the code is well written
• Unit tests for the changes exist - N/A
• Documentation reflects the changes -N/A

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #1412 will not alter performance

_{Comparing ajsanchezsanz:fix/pulling_stable_cython_version (3ca3805) with master (3fbc1f1)}

Summary

✅ 83 untouched benchmarks

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.06%. Comparing base (3fbc1f1) to head (3ca3805).
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1412      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.06%   96.06%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          31       31              
  Lines        5772     5770       -2     
  Branches      345      345              
==========================================
- Hits         5545     5543       -2     
  Misses        201      201              
  Partials       26       26              

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-GHA	96.06% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
MyPy	48.66% <100.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
OS-Linux	99.55% <ø> (ø)
OS-Windows	99.62% <ø> (ø)
OS-macOS	99.30% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.10.11	99.28% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.10.15	99.51% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.11.10	99.51% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.11.9	99.28% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.12.7	99.51% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.13.0	99.51% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.9.13	99.23% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.9.20	99.47% <ø> (ø)
Py-pypy7.3.16	99.53% <ø> (ø)
Py-pypy7.3.17	99.55% <ø> (ø)
VM-macos-latest	99.30% <ø> (ø)
VM-ubuntu-latest	99.55% <ø> (ø)
VM-windows-latest	99.62% <ø> (ø)
pytest	99.55% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[webknjaz]

Let's change or symlink this to a packaging type.

[asvetlov]

Sorry, I don't follow

[webknjaz]

This is a packaging-focused change, not a runtime bug. It only affects people building from sdist or downstream packagers. Hence, it must show up in the packaging category of the changelog.

It is possible to either rename it to 1412.packaging.rst or commit a symlink. With a symlink in place, Towncrier will show this note in two places (bugfixes and packaging). Although, I'm not entirely sure whether it needs to be marked as a bug. Having a note for the downstream packagers is much more important.

[asvetlov]

Ok.
Honestly I don't really care.
Let's rename a file extension without making a symlink

[asvetlov]

Heh, looks like the timeline protector cannot read towncrier config from ./towncrier.toml.
I'll skip the check.

[webknjaz]

The bot works correctly, the config discovery has been fixed long ago. You deleted the file, and so there's no change note in the PR. The proper fix is to actually add one.

[asvetlov]

Aah, my oversight. Sorry.