Repository navigation
Regression from v2023.6.18 for editable package dependencies #5766
Description
Issue description
When installing a package in editable mode, pipenv does not include its transitive dependencies on version 2023.06.26, when it does on version 2023.06.18.
I've created an example repo here: https://github.com/justin-yan/pipenvtest/tree/1aeb6b6d28662319a0250cdd8d8a7220812ed358 where the pipenvtest package is defined with one dependency (pyyaml): https://github.com/justin-yan/pipenvtest/blob/1aeb6b6d28662319a0250cdd8d8a7220812ed358/pyproject.toml#L10
Expected result
- I'm using pipenv installed via
pipx install pipenv==2023.06.18 --force - Running
pipenv lockfrom a clean clone of this repo.
Results in a Pipfile.lock that includes the pyyaml package:
...
"default": {
"pipenvtest": {
"editable": true,
"path": "."
},
"pyyaml": {
"hashes": [
"sha256:01b45c0191e6d66c470b6cf1b9531a771a83c1c4208272ead47a3ae4f2f603bf",
"sha256:0283c35a6a9fbf047493e3a0ce8d79ef5030852c51e9d911a27badfde0605293",
...
Actual result
- I'm using pipenv installed via
pipx install pipenv==2023.06.26 --force - Running
pipenv lockfrom a clean clone of this repo.
Results in a Pipfile.lock that does not include the transitive dependencies of pipenvtest:
...
]
},
"default": {
"pipenvtest": {
"editable": true,
"path": "."
}
},
"develop": {
"attrs": {
"hashes": [
...
Activity
matteius commentedon Jun 30, 2023
Interesting, I suspect this may only be an issue for when the transitive dependencies are defined in the pyproject.toml? This will require further investigation towards a fix, thanks for your report!
matteius commentedon Jun 30, 2023
Initial analysis revealed that
get_pyprojectin requirementslib.model.utils reads that pyproject.toml but is only focused on extending out the build requirements and not the actual dependencies. It should be extended to return both sets of information and the places that utilize it. In the models.requirementsdependenciesproperty, it can then extend thesetup_depslist with the dependencies -- should be the path towards resolving this one.matteius commentedon Jul 1, 2023
@justin-yan I just had a good test run for the proposed fix of this issue if you would like to try out that branch. I just pushed a unit test as well that failed on main and passed on this branch.
justin-yan commentedon Jul 2, 2023
Just tried it out on
2023.7.2.dev0and can confirm that the issue seems to be resolved!