-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7k
migrate packaging to pyproject.toml #9056
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
migrate packaging to pyproject.toml #9056
Conversation
6344069
to
42d468b
Compare
OK, it's almost ready except:
|
8c65e6d
to
6e67258
Compare
This is unrelated to your PR and I fixed it with #9129 |
6e67258
to
b16826c
Compare
Wow. It works indeed. Thank you so much. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We need to hold this off for now. As we got other priorities.
Sure. A vague estimation of when it would become envisageable ? |
To merge after #9210, I hope. |
it was automatically migrated but flake8 doesn't support the pyproject.toml format
zip-safe is deprecated and doesn't do anything. exclude 'tests*' is already the default behaviour
12a5a0b
to
cf25dcd
Compare
watch-out: this PR is intended to be squash-merged |
So... this is a good example of a nice little pr that's a bit stalled. I don't really have any extra bandwidth to keep this moving, given existing commitments. Should we be having a discussion about getting the project into jazzband.co so that we've got a lower barrier of entry for new maintainers? |
Hey, that's a very interesting decision that is (way) beyond the scope of my humble little PR. Maybe let's open a dedicated issue ou GitHub discussion? |
@auvipy did you have time to take a closer look? Is my previous message helpful to review what's going on and what's changed? |
We can defer this until 3.16 release |
Shall we reconsider this now? I know that The conflicts are (I think) caused by #9670 and #9634 EDIT: this might conflict too if merged before: #9681 |
# Conflicts: # .pre-commit-config.yaml # setup.py
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
@browniebroke Do we have a blocker? What is needed to push this forward? |
I don't have any blockers anymore - happy to go ahead with this one. Perhaps for 3.17? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks pretty good to me and hopefully we can get this merged soon! A couple small notes based on recent pyproject.toml changes that could be addressed while waiting for an official ✔️
pyproject.toml
Outdated
requires-python = ">=3.9" | ||
dependencies = ["django>=4.2"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unrelated to my other comments, but a little whitespace makes this a little easier to read:
requires-python = ">=3.9" | |
dependencies = ["django>=4.2"] | |
requires-python = ">= 3.9" | |
dependencies = ["django >= 4.2"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't really mind the way it is now (actually I prefer it).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd recommend https://github.com/tox-dev/pyproject-fmt to standardize this kind of stuff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1 to this comment since the project is already using pre-commit
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes it was on the back of my mind, but didn't want to scope creep too much here 😊 let's review it what this lands
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you don't think this should just be added since this is the PR that introduces the file and the pre-commit check will just keep the formatting consistent going forward?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hum... Yes, I think you're right. It's a new file is added here so let's keep it all together 👍🏻
Co-authored-by: Terence Honles <terencehonles@users.noreply.github.com>
Thanks for the reviews, I've heard about these changes but forgot about them. Applied your suggestions. |
With 3.16.1 now out of the way, I'd like to get this one merged and released on 3.16.2, either on its own or with very minor other changes. 3.17 will have a number of other more significant changes which means we'll keep postponing this. Thoughts? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I realise this was discussed before but I would vote for removing this file entirely.
Django has dropped it since (at least) version 4.2, so if Django can do it, I'd say we can too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I hadn't seen the discussion, but I would vote the same. It's really not providing much other than some "backwards compatibility" for ancient packagers, and they might not be compatible with newer build backends (though I would expect that to be somewhat unlikely). I assume most people are installing via wheels and if it breaks for someone using a non standard approach they can finally update their setup as they have had years to do so.
Just an initiative of my own.
Don't forget to squash merge the PR.