Closed karajan9 closed 4 years ago
Yes, I'm not sure when upper bounds became required with Pkg(3), but I believe that was maybe a year or so ago? Way later than Julia 1.0 with Pkg(3) was introduced. In any case, SR 0.9 is simply too old; we need to figure out why it downgraded to SR 0.9.0. I usually try to force a recent version like ] add StatisticalRethinking@2.2.3
to try to debug these version issues.
I'm still somewhat on the fence about all these bounds as I see more and more of these version storms. I think this particular issue is maybe related to the 4.0 upgrade of MCMCChains, since I integrated that (yesterday) I've seen many issues with Turing and Bijectors. On my system, in Julia 1.4, it downgrades to Turing 0.7 (if I don't work in TuringModels as a project).
I'm not quite sure why that was any more, I think it was because Pkg prefers to install an older version without bounds instead of a newer version and downgrading one of the dependencies. For example, in the linked issue over at DynamicHMC Pkg refused to downgrade Optim from 0.21 to 0.20 and instead installed some year old version.
I think bounds make things more complicated but I'm not convinced working without bounds is better; there was quite a long discussion about this on Discourse.
Anyway, ] add StatisticalRethinking@2.2.3
seems to work well, maybe it's worth to mention that in the readme.
Version
0.9.0
(which weirdly doesn't have a tag, by the way, I wasn't even aware that's possible) does not seem to have any bounds on its dependencies. This means whenever compat doesn't work out perfectly it installs this version instead. I learned this when I addedStatisticalRethinking
and instead of adding 2.2.3 and downgradingStatsBase
from0.33.0
to0.32.2
I gotStatisticalRethinking 0.9.0
.I'm not sure if that's fixable (I'm really not a
Pkg
guru) but if it is it would be great.Sidenotes: I'm not quite sure why the current version can't be installed, I suspect this open compat PR on Clustering.
When I installed
0.9.0
I also stumbled upon https://github.com/tpapp/DynamicHMC.jl/issues/128 which is (I think) why this broke things for @ym-han over on Zulip.