Skip to content
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

Should we keep vendoring dependencies? #4

Closed
Changaco opened this issue Feb 19, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Should we keep vendoring dependencies? #4

Changaco opened this issue Feb 19, 2016 · 3 comments

Comments

@Changaco
Copy link
Member

Picking up from #2 (comment)

Do we want all projects who have dependencies to vendor in virtualenv, setuptools, pip, etc? Why do we expect python to be installed (since we don't vendor it) but not virtualenv and the packaging tools?

The goal of vendoring is to allow offline hacking, right? Why isn't it enough to have a simple reminder in the README that you need to run make env or whatever before going offline?

@chadwhitacre
Copy link
Contributor

I'm fine to not vendor dependencies on AspenWeb projects.

@chadwhitacre
Copy link
Contributor

@pjz is -1 on vendoring.

@Changaco
Copy link
Member Author

Changaco commented Mar 8, 2016

Okay, then let's drop vendoring entirely, it'll be easier than to use Git LFS. I'll make a PR, and once it's merged we'll rebase 527 on top of master.

Changaco added a commit to AspenWeb/pando.py that referenced this issue Mar 9, 2016
Changaco added a commit to AspenWeb/pando.py that referenced this issue Mar 11, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants