Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 3, 2020. It is now read-only.

pkgresources: advanced entry points #30

Merged

Conversation

jirikuncar
Copy link
Contributor

cc @ThiefMaster @pferreir

@jirikuncar jirikuncar added this to the v0.3 milestone Sep 26, 2014
entry_point.load() if self.load else entry_point
)
value = entry_point.load() if self.load else entry_point
is_registered = entry_point.name in self.registry
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

double space

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@ThiefMaster fixed

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.21%) when pulling 3ea8c16 on jirikuncar:advanced-entry-points into 3ab11c3 on inveniosoftware:master.

@jirikuncar jirikuncar changed the title pkgresources: advanced entry points WIP pkgresources: advanced entry points Jun 10, 2015
@jirikuncar jirikuncar changed the title WIP pkgresources: advanced entry points pkgresources: advanced entry points Sep 15, 2015
@jirikuncar
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi, soon it will be one year since our last discussion about making Flask-Registry and Flask-PluginEngine to work together. Would this PR make it easier? What is it missing?

cc @lnielsen @ThiefMaster @pferreir @TimSmithCH

@pferreir
Copy link

IIRC what happened ~1yr ago, the agreement was that we need to sit down and figure out how feasible it would be to bring the two projects together, based on each project's own architecture and needs.

We definitely want (and there's space for that in next year's draft plan for that) to spend some time improving and documenting flask-pluginengine and flask-multipass. Before then, it would be great to have the discussion i mentioned above, a "bottom-up" analysis, based on each project's code, architecture and needs.

It's clear that a joint effort would be the ideal scenario (and there's a lot of potential for a fruitful collaboration), but that can only come after we all have a good understanding of what each project is doing and what are the common needs/points.

@TimSmithCH
Copy link

Pedro, I fully support your last paragraph, and would like to draw everyone's attention to the fact that I have tasked @jbenito3 with a short project to identify the areas of potential for common approaches, and shared codebases, so that we can efficiently plan next years developments in projects coherently

@jirikuncar jirikuncar force-pushed the advanced-entry-points branch 2 times, most recently from 5a1aede to 532e96a Compare July 7, 2016 12:59
jirikuncar and others added 8 commits July 7, 2016 15:02
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kuncar <jiri.kuncar@cern.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kuncar <jiri.kuncar@cern.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kuncar <jiri.kuncar@cern.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kuncar <jiri.kuncar@cern.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kuncar <jiri.kuncar@cern.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kuncar <jiri.kuncar@cern.ch>
@jirikuncar
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have updated the PR so it passes the tests however we don't need dependency checking with our new architecture in Invenio 3. You check how we are loading extensions in Invenio-Base using entry points only.

* Fixes doctests.  (closes inveniosoftware-attic#21)

Signed-off-by: Jiri Kuncar <jiri.kuncar@cern.ch>
@tiborsimko tiborsimko merged commit 699f8fd into inveniosoftware-attic:master Jul 11, 2016
@jirikuncar jirikuncar deleted the advanced-entry-points branch July 11, 2016 19:27
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

7 participants