-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
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
Use Pipfile instead of many requirements.txt files #366
Comments
Looks like base pip does not support the pipfile format. As far as I am aware, pipenv is not distributed with python like pip, so I think we ought to wait. |
I don't think it is a problem, because it is a development environment setup related matter, it is not something that the user would be concerned. |
Can we still recommend users install ipwb using |
|
@ibnesayeed So, a user will still be able to install using pip? As I understand from the documentation, eventual support for using pipfiles from pip is planned. |
Indeed! |
Ok, let's proceed on the efforts to use a pipfile then to resolve the variable, multiple requirements files. |
I would suggest putting effort on this along with the migration to Py3 #51. |
@anatoly-scherbakov we would like your thoughts on this thread and potentially moving to poetry instead? We have not used poetry yet, but we certainly would like a better workflow of managing dependencies. Currently, we are making similar changes in two different files. |
As an update, I still could not find a reference stating that pip has native pipfile support yet. As above, I believe it would be best to use a package manager included with Python rather than requiring the user to install a package manager (e.g., pipenv, poetry) prior to being able to install ipwb. |
Users should be able to run |
I agree. I am not seeing any indication that running |
I think you are mixing a few things up. Running the command If you were to check the code out and from within the code directory run Tools like "poetry" allow storing metadata and dependencies in a different file format, but when you package a bundle, they internally create necessary metadata files suitable for PyPI which is ready to upload. Better yet, we can use poetry itself to upload to PyPI. Currently, we are using a combination of setuptools, wheel, and twine to get all these things done. |
I apologize for my taking so long to respond: there was a bit of a crunch time at work lately. I agree with the comments above: indeed, it is not important what tool the package author used to create a pypi package; to do I have not yet had a chance to publish a package to pypi with Poetry, but I believe this is rather straightforward - their main page https://python-poetry.org/ suggests it is as simple as typing |
Related aside, in forking and publishing py-ipfs-http-client to pypi, I used flit as preconfigured by the project and similar to how @anatoly-scherbakov mentioned with poetry, it was as simple as EDIT: We have since moved back to using the externally developed py-ipfs-http-client since they put out another release (re:flit). |
Pipfile seems to be a more modern approach of maintaining dependencies https://github.com/pypa/pipfile
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: