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

allow builds without pywin32 on any Python #97

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

minrk
Copy link
Member

@minrk minrk commented Sep 24, 2024

but prefer them with pywin32

this adjusts the requirements in #96 by allowing both with and without pywin32 to be installed on any Python, using a build offset to prefer with pywin32 when available. This would allow jupyter-core to be installed on Python 3.13 while pywin32 is not ready (#94).

Note: track_features is not used, because track_features is minimized first, i.e. it needs to be patched onto all past builds in repodata, whereas build offsets result in a more expected preference order.

but _prefer_ them with pywin32 using build offset
Copy link
Contributor

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe/meta.yaml) and found it was in an excellent condition.

@minrk
Copy link
Member Author

minrk commented Sep 24, 2024

Draft, because maybe we don't want this. Pro: this allows installation where/while pywin32 is unavailable (e.g. CPython 3.13 on Windows right now).

@bollwyvl
Copy link
Contributor

allow jupyter-core to be installed on Python 3.13 while pywin32 is not

They wouldn't get much further, as many other parts of the stack also require pywin32 (or rely on jupyter_core to provide tested capability). I don't think it's worth the gamble.

@bollwyvl
Copy link
Contributor

build offsets result in a more expected preference order.

Alas, my expectation has come to be... not knowing what to expect. I feel like I've been having to do more repodata-patches PRs recently to work around broken auto-merges that skip a minor thing, as just "fixing" it and bumping the build number doesn't always seem to work without something to hang the solve on e.g. run_constrained.

@minrk
Copy link
Member Author

minrk commented Sep 24, 2024

Yeah, I think that makes sense! Closing here, but it can live on as a reference if the desire comes back up someday.

@minrk minrk closed this Sep 24, 2024
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants