Add some documentation about whether uv is necessary #1054
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR adds FAQ documentation clarifying that uv is not required to use usethis, though it is recommended. The documentation explains how to bypass uv usage and mentions future plans for additional backend support.
- Adds a new FAQ entry about uv necessity
- Explains the
--backend=noneoption for avoiding uv - Documents uvx as an alternative method for running usethis
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
nathanjmcdougall
deleted the
1029-provide-better-documenting-regarding-whether-uv-is-necessary
branch
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
No description provided.