Allow executing dependency to be >1.0.0

[staticf0x]

Closes #114

I just tested it with executing==1.2.0 and asttokens==2.1.0 and everything seems to work, the tests pass.

This will allow users to update executing to a version greater than 1.0.0, for example in the case of global installation.

Please let me know if there is anything that would prevent this change from being possible. I checked the executing's API and there wasn't any breaking change.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #115 (42cd3a8) into main (5efff5f) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head 42cd3a8 differs from pull request most recent head 2273b5c. Consider uploading reports for the commit 2273b5c to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              main      #115    +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%            
==========================================
  Files            7         4     -3     
  Lines          522       279   -243     
  Branches        86        44    -42     
==========================================
- Hits           522       279   -243     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
devtools/prettier.py
devtools/__init__.py
devtools/utils.py

---

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 5efff5f...2273b5c. Read the comment docs.

[alexmojaki]

I'd actually recommend requiring executing>=1.1.1, especially for Python 3.11.

[samuelcolvin]

Then let's uprev. And require that.

[staticf0x]

Thanks for your comments! So >=1.1.1,<2.0.0 would work here?

[samuelcolvin]

Let's not put in upper bounds unless there's a specific reason to.

[samuelcolvin]

thanks so much.

[samuelcolvin]

@alexmojaki @staticf0x anything else important, or shall I make a release?

I really want #105, #116 and #117 but I don't have time to work on them ATM., so unless someone else is keen, maybe best to release what we have on main now?

[alexmojaki]

I don't see any reason to wait to release.

[staticf0x]

I would be interested in working on #105 and #116 but I won't have time anytime soon, so perhaps next release?

[samuelcolvin]

Great, thanks. Agreed.