docs: mention PyBuffer

[davidhewitt]

Uses PEP 688 types.Buffer to describe PyBuffer<T> in the conversion tables. Will leave as draft until PEP 688 is finalised.

Closes #954

[adamreichold]

Will leave as draft until PEP 688 is finalised.

The PEP seems to be accepted, so can this just be "undrafted"?

[davidhewitt]

Good spot! I've rebased and updated this PR to mention collections.abc.Buffer as per the accepted form of the PEP.

Interestingly the PEP now also defines __buffer__ and __release_buffer__ methods. We may want to consider support for them eventually; I'll create a new ticket.

[davidhewitt]

bors r+

[adamreichold]

It never stops... I think we need to pin wasm-bindgen to version 0.2.84 for the MSRV builds to avoid pulling in syn 2.0.

[bors]

Canceled.

[adamreichold]

bors r+

[davidhewitt]

Thanks for fixing MSRV! How would you feel if I started a patch to bump MSRV to 1.56 as per #3113 ? Would mean we would be waiting until mid June to release 0.19 (i.e. around one month from now)

[adamreichold]

Thanks for fixing MSRV! How would you feel if I started a patch to bump MSRV to 1.56 as per #3113 ? Would mean we would be waiting until mid June to release 0.19 (i.e. around one month from now)

Personally, I would feel better to release the functionality created so far as 0.19 with our current MSRV (because we know it is compatible and already did the work) and then immediately after that go about bumping both Rust and Python version requirements.

I do loathe the MSRV picket line, but I also think it is important work for us maintainers to make our crates available in as many environments as reasonably possible.

[bors]

Build succeeded!

The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon.

If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here.
For more help, visit the forum.

If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page.

• conclusion

[adamreichold]

(This of course purely psychological, but 0.20 would also look nicer than 0.19 as "break-stuff-that-used-to-work" release.)

[adamreichold]

@davidhewitt Penny for your thoughts on whether to bump MSRV before or after releasing 0.19?

[davidhewitt]

I think lets release 0.19 first as you suggest. I'll try to write up a list of what I was hoping to get into 0.19 later