Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Should rich tracebacks be installed automatically if rich is installed and django_typer is in INSTALLED_APPS? #22

Closed
bckohan opened this issue Feb 29, 2024 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
question Further information is requested
Milestone

Comments

@bckohan
Copy link
Owner

bckohan commented Feb 29, 2024

This is currently the default behavior unless the traceback rendering is explicitly disabled.

I think this should be revisited because I'm realizing just how often rich is installed as an incidental dependency. Many users might suddenly be surprised when their stack traces look rad all of a sudden.

Reconsider for 1.1.

  • The rich tracebacks are only installed if django-typer is installed as an app in INSTALLED_APPS which is unnecessary unless users want to use shellcompletion. This means incidental dependencies on django-typer and rich won't trigger this behavior until and unless the user installs django_typer. Maybe this means its fine?

Let me know what you think!

@bckohan bckohan added the question Further information is requested label Feb 29, 2024
@bckohan bckohan self-assigned this Feb 29, 2024
@bckohan bckohan added this to the Version 1.1 milestone Feb 29, 2024
@bckohan bckohan pinned this issue Mar 3, 2024
@bckohan bckohan changed the title Should rich tracebacks be installed automatically if rich is installed? Should rich tracebacks be installed automatically if rich is installed and django_typer is in INSTALLED_APPS? Mar 3, 2024
@bckohan bckohan modified the milestones: Version 1.1, Version 1.2 Apr 4, 2024
@bckohan bckohan modified the milestones: Version 1.2, Version 1.3 Apr 23, 2024
Repository owner locked and limited conversation to collaborators May 21, 2024
@bckohan bckohan converted this issue into discussion #72 May 21, 2024

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant