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
Warn against using requires/provides/obsoletes in setup.py #44463
Comments
It would be nice to see example of setup() call on the page with "requires" keywords argument description http://docs.python.org/dist/node10.html Like: There seems to be mistake in table with examples for "provides" keyword on the same page - it looks like: shouldn't this be mypkg (1.1)? |
Thanks for the report. I fixed the unbalanced paren. I'll leave this open in case someone is ambitious to add more doc. Committed revision 53487. (2.5) |
Anatoly, if you could create the doc in plain text, we could add it. |
Neal, why a piece from bpo-1635217#msg31028 doesn't qualify as an example? It seems that this issue may become obsolete with new packaging guide coming up. |
This report is made obsolete by PEP-345. Be certain that distutils2 docs and tests will contain examples of Requires-Dist and Provides-Dist. |
I still need requires example - here. http://docs.python.org/distutils/setupscript.html#relationships-between-distributions-and-packages - after "Dependencies.." paragraph. =) setup(..., |
It doesn't seem that requires parameter is honored by pip. Should we document install_requires instead? |
Sorry, I have to reject this again.
|
You've nailed it. I think it is important to know that Can we still have proper comment explaining the situation with a pointer to |
It may be good to document that requires/provides/obsoletes are effectively unused. It is not appropriate for stdlib doc to talk about install_requires, which is specific to setuptools, and it’s better to talk about the new standard fields from PEP-345 anyway. |
PEP-345 completely misses practical side. I need to specify dependencies for my package, so that people who checked out the source code could run People reading the docs are more practical. What is the alternative if |
Again, the stdlib docs do not document third-party projects. Use the pip doc if you use pip. |
I am trying to get what's the proposed standard for users right now? How are you going to define dependencies in distutils2? |
Right now the standard (i.e. official) way is Requires, which is unusable; the de facto standard (but not blessed by any PEP) is setuptools’ install_requires. The new standard is documented in d2 docs and there will be examples (http://bugs.python.org/issue1635217#msg112787). |
This issue seems to be controversial. I suggest to open a discussion at te Packaging forum https://discuss.python.org/c/packaging rather than using the bug tracker. I close this issue. |
Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.
Show more details
GitHub fields:
bugs.python.org fields:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: