update imports for strawberry 0.236.0

[novag]

Description

strawberry 0.236.0 changed the code structure which requires adjusting the imports.

Types of Changes

• Core
• Bugfix
• New feature
• Enhancement/optimization
• Documentation

Issues Fixed or Closed by This PR

Checklist

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• I have tested the changes and verified that they work and don't break anything (as well as I can manage).

Summary by Sourcery

This pull request updates the import paths in the relay.py file to be compatible with the changes in the code structure of strawberry 0.236.0, ensuring the project remains functional with the latest version.

• Bug Fixes:
  • Updated import paths to align with the new code structure introduced in strawberry 0.236.0.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide by Sourcery

This pull request updates the import statements in 'src/strawberry_sqlalchemy_mapper/relay.py' to be compatible with the new code structure introduced in strawberry 0.236.0. Specifically, the imports for 'StrawberryContainer' and 'get_object_definition' were changed from 'strawberry.type' to 'strawberry.types.base'.

File-Level Changes

Files	Changes
src/strawberry_sqlalchemy_mapper/relay.py	Adjusted imports to align with the new code structure introduced in strawberry 0.236.0.

---

Tips

• Trigger a new Sourcery review by commenting @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue your discussion with Sourcery by replying directly to review comments.
• You can change your review settings at any time by accessing your dashboard:
  • Enable or disable the Sourcery-generated pull request summary or reviewer's guide;
  • Change the review language;
• You can always contact us if you have any questions or feedback.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @novag - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟢 General issues: all looks good
• 🟢 Security: all looks good
• 🟢 Testing: all looks good
• 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
• 🟢 Documentation: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.}

[botberry]

Thanks for adding the RELEASE.md file!

Here's a preview of the changelog:

---

Updated imports to be compatible with strawberry 0.236.0
Increased the minimum required strawberry version to 0.236.0

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #187 will not alter performance

_{Comparing novag:main (e124a16) with main (3397507)}

Summary

✅ 1 untouched benchmarks

[patrick91]

I'll check this this week 😊 not sure what happened with the CI :D

[bperkins24]

Any update here? It would be great to merge this in to unblock strawberry updates. Happy to contribute somehow.

[Ckk3]

Hi, @novag
Today I joined the Strawberry team as the maintainer for the SQLAlchemy integration. I’ve already started reviewing your code and investigating the issues with our CI.
Thank you for your contributions!

[Ckk3]

Hi, @novag , we have fixed the CI, can you please update your branch from main?
Also, I think we missing the new strawberry version inside the poetry.lock file, can you update this too?

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 85.38%. Comparing base (3397507) to head (e124a16).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #187   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   85.38%   85.38%           
=======================================
  Files          16       16           
  Lines        1615     1615           
  Branches      128      128           
=======================================
  Hits         1379     1379           
  Misses        183      183           
  Partials       53       53           

[Ckk3]

Thanks, @novag , please fix the failed tests when you can 😉

[Ckk3]

Just to make your job a little more fast, I've checked that you cax fix by just changing _fields to fields (since StrawberryObjectDefinition has been changed)

I've tested this locally and worked on both failing tests

[novag]

Yes, thanks. I'm trying to determine what has changed that's now preventing the linter from inferring the lambda type.

[Ckk3]

Hi @novag, I hope the investigation is going well! It’s been a week since we last discussed it. What do you think about pushing the current changes, especially to the tests, to see if the link tests are still failing? Let me know if you need any help!

[Ckk3]

@novag I noticed that the CI failed again on the lint check, but there's also a new error that has surfaced. It seems related to the new Ubuntu LTS (benchmark) and the Python environment (test matrix generation). I'll investigate further on another PR.

[Ckk3]

Hi, @novag , the CI fix is already on main, please update your branch when you can.

[novag]

@Ckk3 Thanks for fixing the CI! I am currently very limited in time, however I will have another look at the linter error today or tomorrow.

[bperkins24]

Hi @novag. It would be great to get this done. There are features in newer versions of strawberry that are very useful for my firm and we are blocked on using them until this is resolved.

[novag]

mypy fails at line 213 in src/strawberry_sqlalchemy_mapper/field.py because it cannot infer the type of the lambda expression. Although I don't think there's anything wrong here, I have not yet been able to find out why this check would have been successful before updating to strawberry 0.236.0. mypy should be able to infer the type from the default arguments given to the lambda expression. field.py is also sprinkled with # type: ignore comments. If that's finde for @Ckk3 we can just add one after the lambda expression.

If anyone is more familiar with mypy, I would appreciate any input.

[Ckk3]

I like this option, what you guys think @patrick91 @bellini666 @TimDumol ?

[bellini666]

I like this option, what you guys think @patrick91 @bellini666 @TimDumol ?

I think it is fine to ignore that specific error, even more because it is not actually related to this PR :)

[Ckk3]

LGTM, let's just wait to see what the other maintainers think.

[botberry]

Thanks for contributing to Strawberry! 🎉 You've been invited to join
the Strawberry GraphQL organisation 😊

You can also request a free sticker by filling this form: https://forms.gle/dmnfQUPoY5gZbVT67

And don't forget to join our discord server: https://strawberry.rocks/discord 🔥

[Ckk3]

Thanks @novag !