Remove filterwarnings configuration

[jdufresne]

Contributor checklist

• Provided the tests for the changes.
• Gave a clear one-line description in the PR (that the maintainers can add to CHANGELOG.md on release).
• Assign the PR to an existing or new milestone for the target version (following Semantic Versioning).

[atugushev]

No longer appear during tests so these filters can safely be removed.

I've tried it locally and got these warnings:

================================== warnings summary ==================================
.venv/src/pip/src/pip/_vendor/packaging/version.py:127: 72 warnings
tests/test_cli_compile.py: 5049 warnings
tests/test_cli_sync.py: 936 warnings
tests/test_repository_local.py: 108 warnings
tests/test_repository_pypi.py: 756 warnings
tests/test_resolver.py: 20 warnings
tests/test_top_level_editable.py: 81 warnings
  /Users/albert/Projects/pip-tools/.venv/src/pip/src/pip/_vendor/packaging/version.py:127: DeprecationWarning: Creating a LegacyVersion has been deprecated and will be removed in the next major release
    warnings.warn(

tests/test_resolver.py: 22 warnings
  /Users/albert/Projects/pip-tools/.venv/src/pip/src/pip/_vendor/packaging/specifiers.py:283: DeprecationWarning: Creating a LegacyVersion has been deprecated and will be removed in the next major release
    warnings.warn(

-- Docs: https://docs.pytest.org/en/stable/warnings.html

Since pip-tools has no control over what uses pip internally those warnings were disabled intentionally to avoid distraction. However, pip-tools uses vendored packages too:

$ git grep pip._vendor | wc -l
      13

This makes me think that we should not filter those warnings to avoid missing a valuable warning 🤔

[jdufresne]

Okay, I can reproduce the warnings locally. Not sure what I was looking at before.

This makes me think that we should not filter those warnings to avoid missing a valuable warning thinking

IMO, this is the right thing to do. We don't want to ignore upstream warnings if they could point towards required action. Shall we go ahead?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1252 (b2af778) into master (749f782) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1252   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.59%   99.59%           
=======================================
  Files          36       36           
  Lines        2947     2947           
  Branches      333      333           
=======================================
  Hits         2935     2935           
  Misses          6        6           
  Partials        6        6           

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 749f782...b2af778. Read the comment docs.

[atugushev]

IMO, this is the right thing to do. We don't want to ignore upstream warnings if they could point towards required action. Shall we go ahead?

Yeah, let's merge it then. Thanks! 👍

[jdufresne]

The warning listed above looks like the upstream issue: pypa/setuptools#2466