-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
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
Per-requirement --no-binary
/ --only-binary
should not require name
#4946
Comments
Hi @Kentzo! Thanks for filing this issue! This behaviour is useful when you specify more than one package as required for installation (say via a requirements file) where you only want to selectively specify these options for a certain package. While it does get mildly repetitive in some cases, I don't really think that's are common/bad enough to warrant changing this behaviour introducing potential for ambiguity in interpretation of the command line and losing this fine control that the current form provides. |
Current syntax should be retained. For requirements files it could be extended to deduce package name. Less space for an error. |
Hello! Thanks for the suggestion. I can see the appeal of implicitly applying options to the current requirement without requiring the option name. The downside of this approach would be the backwards incompatibility - we wouldn't be able to tell how to properly parse this for example: Are there any other use cases we're missing that would justify the downsides? |
This issue has been automatically closed because there has been no response to our request for more information from the original author. With only the information that is currently in the issue, we don't have enough information to take action. Please reach out if you have or find the answers we need so that we can investigate further. |
Description:
Currently both
--no-binary
and--only-binary
require an argument even if they already belong to a requirement. Instead, they should not require any arguments. Specifying one should be an error.Current:
Should be:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: