Replace pkg_resources dependency with packaging.requirement #445
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
We're about to replace our dependency on pkg_resources (from setuptools) with packaging.requirements instead. Coincidentally, packaging is already a transitive dependency of ours (via pip-requirements-parser), so this does not add any additional bloat when installing FawltyDeps. We require >=24.0 of this package even though there already exists a later 24.1 release. The reason for this is that 24.0 is the last release to support Python v3.7.
We no longer use the pkg_resources module, and that allows us to drop our dependency on setuptools. With that gone, we also no longer need the types-setuptools package available to help type-checking.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes issue #443.
Getting away from our use of
pkg_resourcesturns out to be relatively easy:The
packagingpackage from the Python Packaging Authority is probably as close as we can get to an official and authoritative upstream for this kind of logic, and thepackaging.requirements.Requirementclass seems to encapsulate the equivalent logic thepkg_resources.Requirementclass that we have used for this purpose until now.At least, our test suite seems to pass with no further adjustments after this change. :-)
Note that this only concerns the parsing of single requirement strings as they occur in
setup.pyandpyproject.tomlfiles.For parsing full
requirements.txtfiles we still rely on pip-requirements-parser.The reason for this is two-fold:
packaging.requirementsdoes not include functionality to parse complete files (and we don't want to have to deal with fiddly details like line continuations inrequirements.txtfiles ourselves)pip_requirements_parserdoes not include a good API for parsing requirements strings that are not part of a fullrequirements.txtfile (requires writing a temp file as seen here: https://github.com/nexB/pip-requirements-parser/pull/19/files)Commits:
packagingas a core dependencypkg_resources.Requirementwithpackaging.requirements.Requirementsetuptools(andtypes-setuptools) as a FawltyDeps dependency