-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 640
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Do not publish wheels for all SHAs, and publish to PyPI from Github Actions. #19028
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
YAY!
I wonder if we can (with appropriate warning) stop building the pex.
Why do we build a PEX? 😄 |
I don't know if anyone uses it. It's gigantic, and yet still doesn't run on ARM64 macos or linux. |
Possibly. A PEX lockfile is effectively equivalent to a PEX. And so I think that if |
So do we build the PEX so that we have Pants and all its deps consistent, and in one file? |
I'm not sure why, and I don't think anyone consumes it these days. |
@benjyw , @thejcannon : I've retitled and reopened #12397: we initially thought that #7369 would resolve both that issue and #11614, but I do think that we still need to adjust the distribution model to either PEX or PyOxidizer. |
I think I'm missing one step on that journey. Where does PEX come in play? Is the idea that we upload built PEXs of Pants to Releases, and then And what do we do today? Just manually make a venv and |
Correct. |
Or, we build pants itself as a scie? |
@benjyw : Yea, possibly. That still involves a PEX though: it just moves the interpreter bootstrapping out of |
This change:
See the docs changes for a high level overview.