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

requires-python without * caused missing wheels in uv.lock #8169

Closed
ringsaturn opened this issue Oct 14, 2024 · 5 comments
Closed

requires-python without * caused missing wheels in uv.lock #8169

ringsaturn opened this issue Oct 14, 2024 · 5 comments
Labels
duplicate This issue or pull request already exists question Asking for clarification or support

Comments

@ringsaturn
Copy link

ringsaturn commented Oct 14, 2024

  • uv: 0.4.20
  • platform: Apple M3 Max
  • cmd: uv lock

With config:

[project]
name = "demo"
version = "0.1.0"
readme = "README.md"

dependencies = [
    "pymongo==4.10.0",
]

requires-python = "==3.12"

Output:

image

If use requires-python = "==3.12.*", problem fixed.

Seems this came from #7904

@ringsaturn ringsaturn changed the title requires-python without * cased missing wheels in uv.lock requires-python without * caused missing wheels in uv.lock Oct 14, 2024
@zanieb
Copy link
Member

zanieb commented Oct 14, 2024

Please see #7426

@zanieb zanieb added duplicate This issue or pull request already exists question Asking for clarification or support labels Oct 14, 2024
@charliermarsh charliermarsh closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Oct 14, 2024
@ringsaturn
Copy link
Author

Please see #7426

It's same root reason that uv hasn't define how a version without patch field is processed.

But caused unexpected behavior for wheel locking scenes. Maybe add bug label would be more appropriate.

@zanieb
Copy link
Member

zanieb commented Oct 14, 2024

It's same root reason that uv hasn't define how a version without patch field is processed.

This behavior is not defined by us, it's a part of the Python standards and specifications — which we are following here.

@ringsaturn
Copy link
Author

It's same root reason that uv hasn't define how a version without patch field is processed.

This behavior is not defined by us, it's a part of the Python standards and specifications — which we are following here.

Thanks, looks like uv followed the PEP 440 for this.

@zanieb
Copy link
Member

zanieb commented Oct 14, 2024

Yep! We're adding a warning for people who run into this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
duplicate This issue or pull request already exists question Asking for clarification or support
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants