chore(openfeature): pin mixpanel >=5.3.0 for FallbackReason (SDK-126)#185
Draft
tylerjroach wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
The openfeature-provider now dereferences `SelectedVariant.fallback_reason` (added in SDK-79 / #180). The published mixpanel versions in the current range (`>=5.1.0,<6` — v5.1.0 and v5.2.0) both predate SDK-79 and do NOT expose that attribute; installing this provider against either raises `AttributeError` from `_fallback_details`. Bump the floor to `>=5.3.0` (the next unreleased minor). CI will fail until mixpanel 5.3.0 is published with the SDK-79 changes — that failure is the point: it forces the correct release sequencing so this wrapper cannot ship against a base version that lacks the field it uses. Also bump the wrapper version 0.1.0 -> 0.2.0 since fallback-reason wrapping is a new capability surface. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Confidence Score: 5/5This looks safe to merge after Mixpanel 5.3.0 is published.
|
| Filename | Overview |
|---|---|
| openfeature-provider/pyproject.toml | Raises the dependency floor to the intended compatible SDK release and bumps the provider package version. |
Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "chore(openfeature): pin mixpanel >=5.3.0..." | Re-trigger Greptile
Draft
3 tasks
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #185 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 95.98% 95.89% -0.10%
==========================================
Files 13 10 -3
Lines 2414 1971 -443
Branches 136 116 -20
==========================================
- Hits 2317 1890 -427
+ Misses 63 51 -12
+ Partials 34 30 -4
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Follow-up to SDK-79. Now that
openfeature-provider/src/mixpanel_openfeature/provider.pydereferencesSelectedVariant.fallback_reason(_fallback_details), themixpanel-openfeaturePyPI package must not resolve against a basemixpanelversion that predates that field, or everyresolve_*_detailscall raisesAttributeError.Currently the wrapper's dep is
mixpanel>=5.1.0,<6. Both published versions in that range (5.1.0, 5.2.0) predate #180's merge — so the wrapper is currently broken when installed against either.Changes
openfeature-provider/pyproject.toml: bumpmixpanel>=5.1.0,<6→mixpanel>=5.3.0,<6openfeature-provider/pyproject.toml: bump wrapper version0.1.0→0.2.0(new capability surface)Merge sequencing
CI is expected to fail until mixpanel 5.3.0 is published with the SDK-79 changes. That failure is the point — it forces the correct release order:
Same pattern as mixpanel/mixpanel-ruby#166 for Ruby.
Test plan
mixpanel-openfeature==0.2.0againstmixpanel==5.2.0raises a dependency-resolution error rather than a runtimeAttributeErrorRefs: SDK-126, SDK-79
🤖 Generated with Claude Code