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

Optional dependency for database requirements #412

Closed
Duncan-Hunter opened this issue Jul 23, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Optional dependency for database requirements #412

Duncan-Hunter opened this issue Jul 23, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Duncan-Hunter
Copy link
Contributor

Motivation: describe the problem to be solved
The most recent version bumped up some requirements, specifically SQLAlchemy 2, which is a good thing and keeping dependencies up to date is important. However, it now forces me to migrate to SQLAlchemy 2 (which is something I should do), and install other database requirements, when it's not part of the library that I use. Something similar is mentioned here.

Describe the solution you'd like
I'd like to add optional dependencies for the database module. As far as I can tell, it's only sqlmodel and maybe psycopg2-binary that would need an extra.

Describe alternatives you've considered
just upgrading my internal SQLAlchemy library to handle version 2, which is something on my todo list.

@Duncan-Hunter Duncan-Hunter added the enhancement New feature or request label Jul 23, 2024
@Duncan-Hunter
Copy link
Contributor Author

Duncan-Hunter commented Jul 24, 2024

And can I also tack on updating the s3fs and gcfs requirement, as it limits it to versions before 2023, which is kind of putting me in versioning hell

@michael-nml
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey @Duncan-Hunter, thank you for wanting to use the latest version of nannyml! You're right, being forced to update SQLAlchemy (and other dependencies you don't need) just to use nannyml really isn't intended.

Reducing the dependencies (or making them optional) has been on our to-do list for a while. Unfortunately we haven't had the time yet - sorry about that. I should be able to look into it in a few weeks. If it's urgent for you, do you want to take a stab at a PR for making the database module optional?

@nnansters
Copy link
Contributor

Closed thanks to the wonderful contribution of @Duncan-Hunter !

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants