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

Do an audit of requirements files, pyproject.toml, ci config, tox #747

Open
willingc opened this issue Nov 15, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

Do an audit of requirements files, pyproject.toml, ci config, tox #747

willingc opened this issue Nov 15, 2023 · 5 comments
Labels
bug needs:discussion additional discussion is requested

Comments

@willingc
Copy link
Member

We seem to have added some complexity and it probably makes sense to audit these workflows.

@willingc willingc added bug needs:discussion additional discussion is requested labels Nov 15, 2023
@willingc
Copy link
Member Author

If I am understanding correctly, everything in requirements folder is dev and extras. The requirements.txt is the base requirements to build papermill. The docs/requirements.txt should have both the docs requirements and the package requirements which doesn't currently work. Does that align with other's understanding.

@willingc
Copy link
Member Author

I'm going to when I have time...try to switch this to the more modern packaging format. I think if we use hatch we can get rid of a bunch of stuff including tox and slim down the config files and lean more into pyproject.toml. This should improve maintainability.

@MSeal
Copy link
Member

MSeal commented Nov 17, 2023

Yes I think Python3.13 might force the issue anyway, but I agree we need to redo the setup.py / requirements pattern.

@Borda
Copy link
Member

Borda commented Nov 21, 2023

Would you be in favor of moving out of tox? and using pure pytest and GHA?

@ofek
Copy link

ofek commented Dec 6, 2023

Maintainer of Hatch and Hatchling here! Let me know if I can be of assistance 🙂

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug needs:discussion additional discussion is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants