Refs #640. Normalize a relative egg-link path before checking to see if it matches #641

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
7 participants

kylegibson commented Aug 16, 2012 edited by BrownTruck

No description provided.

This pull request passes (merged a87f259 into 1749343).

Contributor

mcdonc commented Sep 7, 2012

This patch looks great. Do you think you might be able to contribute a test or two to "tests/test_uninstall.py"?

@mcdonc Yeah I can. Given that this patch depends on behavior of virtualenv after a package has already been installed, is it sufficient enough to just recreate the situation manually (i.e. create an egg-link file that is relative), or do you suggest something else?

Contributor

carljm commented Sep 13, 2012

@kylegibson The pip tests already create a scratch virtualenv for each test, so you do have the option of actually calling virtualenv --relocatable in the test (there is some code that reuses virtualenvs between tests to speed things up, so you'll want to make sure this one doesn't get reused, I'd have to dig into test_pip.py to recall exactly how that's done). You can either do that or try to accurately reconstruct its effects, whichever you find more straightforward.

Contributor

mcdonc commented Sep 13, 2012

On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 02:31 -0700, Kyle Gibson wrote:

@mcdonc Yeah I can. Given that this patch depends on behavior of
virtualenv after a package has already been installed, is it
sufficient enough to just recreate the situation manually (i.e. create
an egg-link file that is relative), or do you suggest something else?

That sounds fine. You can probably take some inspiration from other
tests in the same module, as well.

Contributor

msabramo commented Mar 5, 2015

This needed tests which were never added and now it doesn't merge cleanly. I'd say close it.

Contributor

msabramo commented Mar 10, 2015

Unless @kylegibson is interested in updating this to merge cleanly and add tests,
I'd say this can be closed to make the # of outstanding PRs more manageable.

dstufft closed this May 18, 2016

Owner

dstufft commented May 18, 2016

Accidentally closed this, reopening. Sorry!

dstufft reopened this May 18, 2016

Hello!

As part of an effort to ease the contribution process and adopt a more standard workflow pip has switched to doing development on the master branch. However, this Pull Request was made against the develop branch so it will need to be resubmitted against master. Unfortunately, this pull request does not cleanly merge against the current master branch.

If you do nothing, this Pull Request will be automatically closed by @BrownTruck since it cannot be merged.

If this pull request is still valid, please rebase it against master (or merge master into it) and resubmit it against the master branch, closing and referencing the original Pull Request.

If you choose to rebase/merge and resubmit this Pull Request, here is an example message that you can copy and paste:



---

*This was migrated from pypa/pip#641 to reparent it to the ``master`` branch. Please see original pull request for any previous discussion.*

This Pull Request was closed because it cannot be automatically reparented to the master branch and it appears to have bit rotted.

Please feel free to re-open it or re-submit it if it is still valid and you have rebased it onto master or merged master into it.

BrownTruck closed this May 26, 2016

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment