Closed Nowosad closed 2 months ago
From a glance doesn't seem anything affects our code directly. Thoughts @anitagraser and @michaeldorman ? I guess we need to just test as @Nowosad says. A dev-packages.yml
workflow could help with that.
There are some code changes required. For example, .unary_union
is flagged to be deprecated, replaced by .union_all()
(which doesn't exist in geopandas==0.14.*
). I suggest we switch to the newer functions whenever possible, what do you think? (If so, I will be happy if you can please update the package version on GitHub so that the book is rendered and tested with geopandas==1.0.0
on GitHub as well)
There are some code changes required. For example,
.unary_union
is flagged to be deprecated, replaced by.union_all()
(which doesn't exist ingeopandas==0.14.*
). I suggest we switch to the newer functions whenever possible, what do you think? (If so, I will be happy if you can please update the package version on GitHub so that the book is rendered and tested withgeopandas==1.0.0
on GitHub as well)
Agreed, let's go with the later version. I'm time limited and most geocompx attention on geocompr this week, if anyone else has a chance to look at the .yml or Docker build settings that would be most appreciated.
If not I should be able to look at this next week.
Also advices from Martin seems to be useful: https://fosstodon.org/@martinfleis/112433669245696411
Also advices from Martin seems to be useful: https://fosstodon.org/@martinfleis/112433669245696411
Now read the document, as far as I can tell we're already implementing all of the relevant advice
https://martinfleischmann.net/geopandas-1.0-is-coming.-what-will-change/