MNT: Re-rendered with conda-build 3.23.1, conda-smithy 3.22.0.gh_1699…

[mbargull]

…, and conda-forge-pinning 2022.12.02.15.22.41

Re-rendered with conda-smithy 3.22.0 patched with
conda-forge/conda-smithy#1699

Checklist

• Used a personal fork of the feedstock to propose changes
• Bumped the build number (if the version is unchanged)
• Reset the build number to 0 (if the version changed)
• Re-rendered with the latest conda-smithy (Use the phrase @conda-forge-admin, please rerender in a comment in this PR for automated rerendering)
• Ensured the license file is being packaged.

Trying to fix uploads for Windows builds. Follow-up to gh-181 and gh-186 .

[conda-forge-linter]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe) and found it was in an excellent condition.

[jakirkham]

Would suggest we push this to a branch on the feedstock once CI passes. That way we can see if it is working or not (since we are checking whether uploads work).

Longer term we might want to think about how we can reproduce the step that failed as part of the build without needing to upload (IOW running whatever verification is being run).

[mbargull]

Would suggest we push this to a branch on the feedstock once CI passes. That way we can see if it is working or not (since we are checking whether uploads work).

The main branch is a good as any for that.. (At least we have the commit from which packages were built in its history then.)

[jakirkham]

Sure no problem with merging. Just if there are issues, we need to create more PRs potentially. Trying to save us extra churn, but no strong feelings either way.

[jakirkham]

Looks like one of the Windows builds worked! 🎉