[Biopython] Planning Biopython 1.87

[Peter Cock]

I made that change last week, and have just tested the wheel building:
https://github.com/biopython/biopython-wheels/actions

Other than the loss of Intel macOS wheels (as the runners we used to use
have been retired), that all looks good.

I propose to do the Biopython 1.87 release today/tomorrow, and so ask
those with merge permissions to hold off till that's done.

Thank you,

Peter


Peter



On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 11:13 AM Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> We're still blocking on a NumPy 2.4 incompatibility:
> https://github.com/biopython/biopython/issues/5135
>
> I am strongly leaning to the quick fix of changing the failing test in
> #5161 (with the possibility of a better fix late), but want a consesus
> or at least another voice in favour. If anyone using the vector
> classes in Bio.PDB had some input that would be useful.
>
> Peter
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 10:11 AM Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Also https://github.com/biopython/biopython/issues/5109 which Michiel has been working on.
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 2:29 PM Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Biopythoneers,
> >>
> >> I think once the following are resolved (they have pull requests), we should do the next release:
> >>
> >> * NumPy 2.4 compatibility
> >>    https://github.com/biopython/biopython/issues/5135
> >>
> >> * Using pyproject.toml rather than setup.py
> >>    https://github.com/biopython/biopython/pull/5142
> >>
> >> Ideally sooner rather than later as the PDB _ATOM_FORMAT_STRING glitch introduced in Biopython 1.86 seems to be hitting a lot of people:
> >> https://github.com/biopython/biopython/issues/5097
> >>
> >> Is there anything else you think is urgent enough to wait on?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Peter