Better Handling of Asyncio

[blink1073]

• Drop support for Python 3.7 for 2.x
• Handle all deprecations relating to event loops with client 8
• Fork a few of pytest-tornasync fixtures with better handling of event loops
• Initialize io_loop earlier (cf initialize ioloop earlier #934)
• Remove utils.run_sync function (was only used in one test).
• Deprecate redundant utils.run_sync_in_loop, was used by jupyter_server_terminals
• Get all tests passing

[blink1073]

Currently working with client 8 and test_gateway.py:

$ pytest test_gateway.py
================================================= test session starts ==================================================
platform darwin -- Python 3.10.7, pytest-7.1.3, pluggy-1.0.0
rootdir: /Users/steve.silvester/workspace/jupyter_server, configfile: pyproject.toml
plugins: anyio-3.6.1, asyncio-0.19.0, timeout-2.1.0, console-scripts-1.3.1
asyncio: mode=auto
timeout: 300.0s
timeout method: signal
timeout func_only: False
collected 23 items

test_gateway.py .......................                                                                          [100%]

================================================= slowest 10 durations =================================================
1.00s call     tests/test_gateway.py::test_channel_queue_get_msg_without_timeout
0.10s call     tests/test_gateway.py::test_channel_queue_get_msg_raises_empty_after_timeout
0.07s setup    tests/test_gateway.py::test_gateway_env_options
0.05s setup    tests/test_gateway.py::test_gateway_session_lifecycle
0.05s setup    tests/test_gateway.py::test_gateway_get_kernelspecs
0.05s setup    tests/test_gateway.py::test_gateway_shutdown[True]
0.05s setup    tests/test_gateway.py::test_gateway_get_named_kernelspec
0.05s setup    tests/test_gateway.py::test_kernel_client_response_router_notifies_channel_queue_when_finished
0.05s setup    tests/test_gateway.py::test_gateway_shutdown[False]
0.05s setup    tests/test_gateway.py::test_gateway_kernel_lifecycle
================================================== 23 passed in 2.14s ==================================================

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 86.13861% with 14 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.10%. Comparing base (122758f) to head (9c72594).
Report is 317 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
jupyter_server/pytest_plugin.py	89.58%	2 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
jupyter_server/serverapp.py	78.57%	1 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
jupyter_server/base/zmqhandlers.py	60.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
jupyter_server/services/kernels/handlers.py	85.71%	2 Missing ⚠️
jupyter_server/utils.py	33.33%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1035      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.60%   73.10%   +0.50%     
==========================================
  Files          64       64              
  Lines        8257     8274      +17     
  Branches     1259     1643     +384     
==========================================
+ Hits         5995     6049      +54     
+ Misses       1847     1816      -31     
+ Partials      415      409       -6     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[blink1073]

Cool, that gets the downstream tests passing again.

[vidartf]

Flagging for public awareness! :)

[Zsailer]

Thanks for flagging, @vidartf.

@blink1073 you mentioned that SciPy ecosystem has a policy where they support the last few versions, even if the oldest version hasn't reach end-of-life. Do you have a link to something stating this policy? It would be nice to point to it, in case folks have concerns about this bump.

I found this support table from Numpy: https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0029-deprecation_policy.html

This shows that Numpy will drop support for 3.7 in December.

[blink1073]

Here's the link from conda-forge: https://conda-forge.org/docs/user/announcements.html#dropping-python-3-7

[blink1073]

Note this drop is only for the 2.x branch, we will still keep support in 1.x

[Zsailer]

Thank you!

[blink1073]

This is ready for review. I'll follow up with a PR to make the base manager classes async, and deprecate the sync managers.

[Zsailer]

Thank you, @blink1073. You are the man.

These changes look good to me!