Skip to content
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

PythonPackage easyblock: modulename should be a first-class parameter, not under the options parameter #2352

Open
bryank-cs opened this issue Mar 1, 2021 · 2 comments
Milestone

Comments

@bryank-cs
Copy link

Currently to set the python module name to test in the sanity check the syntax is: "options={'modulename':'newname'}". The request is to change it to simply "modulename='newname'".

@boegel boegel added this to the 5.0 milestone Oct 12, 2023
@boegel
Copy link
Member

boegel commented Oct 12, 2023

There should also be a more intuitive (and documented...) way of skipping the import check than setting modulename to False...

@boegel boegel added the EasyBuild-5.0 EasyBuild 5.0 label Oct 12, 2023
@Flamefire
Copy link
Contributor

Note that for extensions it is already fine:

exts_list = [
    ('hydra-colorlog', '1.2.0', {
        'sanity_pip_check': False,
        'modulename': 'hydra',
        'checksums': ['d44f85008fabd2448c7e3b496c31b44d7610560f6fff74f3673afaa949870899'],
    }),
]

It doesn't get better there. So the requested change only applies to "root" PythonPackage. It looks like it is the only entry used from "self.options" so it indeed makes sense and I guess for extensions that would just work.

There should also be a more intuitive (and documented...) way of skipping the import check than setting modulename to False...

That is only done for extensions isn't it? We should do it for PythonPackage too. Also note that "skipping the import check" also means that --skip won't work. So IMO we should just better document the behavior as I think modulename: False is clear enough for the only valid use case I can imagine: There is no package which could be imported.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants