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

Revise pipenv version mixing caveat #452

Closed
ncoghlan opened this issue Mar 7, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Revise pipenv version mixing caveat #452

ncoghlan opened this issue Mar 7, 2018 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
good first issue type: bug A confirmed bug or unintended behavior

Comments

@ncoghlan
Copy link
Member

ncoghlan commented Mar 7, 2018

pipenv 11 uses the Python in the virtual environment to generate the lock file now, so version differences between the host Python and venv Python are no longer a problem. The caveat should be reworded to:

  1. Make sure folks are using pipenv 11+
  2. Note that pipenv folks on a single target version, and running pipenv install on a different version may implicitly install extra unpinned dependencies (if requires_python isn't explicitly set in Pipfile). (Alternatively, we could just recommend always setting requires_python, and note that while possible, dependency locking when targeting multiple versions of Python can be a bit tricky due to version dependent dependencies)
@theacodes theacodes self-assigned this Mar 7, 2018
@theacodes theacodes added the type: bug A confirmed bug or unintended behavior label Mar 7, 2018
@ncoghlan
Copy link
Member Author

@theacodes Maybe we should go with the "just delete it for now" option? If folks running old versions of pipenv comes up as a problem, we could add a new caveat for that rather than amending this one.

@theacodes
Copy link
Member

Yeah let's just take it out. We seem to recommend a eager update strategy for tools.

@ncoghlan
Copy link
Member Author

I've pretty much come around to the perspective of the browser developers when it comes to networked software: if a client is allowed to access the public internet, "evergreen" is pretty much the only safe update management strategy (and then you redesign everything else around that policy).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue type: bug A confirmed bug or unintended behavior
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants