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

Document using setup.cfg for src-layouts #1537

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Oct 28, 2018
Merged

Document using setup.cfg for src-layouts #1537

merged 4 commits into from Oct 28, 2018

Conversation

@madig
Copy link
Contributor

@madig madig commented Oct 27, 2018

Summary of changes

Document how to use setup.cfg with src/ layouts.

Closes #1524.

Pull Request Checklist

  • Changes have tests
  • News fragment added in changelog.d.
Copy link
Member

@pganssle pganssle left a comment

Just a few minor tweaks to the wording, overall this looks very good.

Also, one of these you use :: for a colon and in another line you use :. I am not super familiar with RST, is there a difference?

@@ -2400,6 +2400,34 @@ Metadata and options are set in the config sections of the same name.
* Unknown keys are ignored.


Using a ``src/`` layout (storing packages in a subdirectory)

This comment has been minimized.

@pganssle

pganssle Oct 27, 2018
Member

Suggested change
Using a ``src/`` layout (storing packages in a subdirectory)
Using a ``src/`` layout

I think maybe we don't need the parenthetical part of this.

Using a ``src/`` layout (storing packages in a subdirectory)
============================================================

If you use a ``src/`` layout, as in, you package structure looks like this::

This comment has been minimized.

@pganssle

pganssle Oct 27, 2018
Member

Suggested change
If you use a ``src/`` layout, as in, you package structure looks like this::
One commonly used package configuration has all the module source code in a subdirectory (often called the `src/` layout), like this::
├── setup.py
└── setup.cfg

You can set up your ``setup.cfg`` to automatically look up all your packages in

This comment has been minimized.

@pganssle

pganssle Oct 27, 2018
Member

Suggested change
You can set up your ``setup.cfg`` to automatically look up all your packages in
You can set up your ``setup.cfg`` to automatically find all your packages in
@pganssle
Copy link
Member

@pganssle pganssle commented Oct 27, 2018

Also, I'm happy to merge with just the documentation, but if you want to it would be nice to have a test that this setup.cfg configuration works properly.

@madig
Copy link
Contributor Author

@madig madig commented Oct 28, 2018

Oh right, I can put a test in somewhere.

Not sure about the double-colon, I just copy-pasted it from further up.

Edit: apparently needed to make a block.

@pganssle
Copy link
Member

@pganssle pganssle commented Oct 28, 2018

Ah, I see, the second one has the code block thing.

PyPA Sprint Weekend at Bloomberg (2018) automation moved this from Submitted PRs to Approved PRs Oct 28, 2018
@jaraco jaraco merged commit 4c9216e into pypa:master Oct 28, 2018
5 checks passed
5 checks passed
@codecov
codecov/patch Coverage not affected when comparing 56a7c44...009e0a9
Details
@codecov
codecov/project 81.45% remains the same compared to 56a7c44
Details
continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
deploy/netlify Deploy preview ready!
Details
PyPA Sprint Weekend at Bloomberg (2018) automation moved this from Approved PRs to Merged PRs Oct 28, 2018
@jaraco
Copy link
Member

@jaraco jaraco commented Oct 28, 2018

Nice work @madig. Thanks for the review @pganssle.

@madig madig deleted the madig:doc-setup.cfg-src-layout branch Oct 28, 2018
@madig
Copy link
Contributor Author

@madig madig commented Oct 28, 2018

I can come up with a test when I get to it :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
No open projects
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants