-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.9k
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
improve parsing of packages with options #2734
Conversation
The line of logic seems fine to me, just need to figure out what the failing test is |
|
64e8777
to
4d1b043
Compare
Thanks for the pointer. The variables were not defined. Pushed an update with a fix. (Is there no way to see the build results as a contributor?) |
I am actually the only person who can see builds right now unfortunately (because of not very good reasons) -- does this supersede your other pr? |
Also here is the log:
|
57c64c2
to
b02cd5a
Compare
Hmm, is This does supersede my other PR, yes. I have provided an update, let's see. |
No worries :) and no, you would always need a target. |
The issue
This fixes somewhat buggy code in parsing the package names during a
pipenv install
.The fix
This fixes the problem by going through the arguments to
pipenv install
in sequence, then checking if one argument is-e
or-i
/--index
/--extra-index-url
, and subsequently treating the following argument in the list as necessary.This makes it possible to specify multiple editable dependencies rather than just one (see #2733). It also supersedes that PR.
The checklist
news/
directory to describe this fix with the extension.bugfix
,.feature
,.behavior
,.doc
..vendor
. or.trivial
(this will appear in the release changelog). Use semantic line breaks and name the file after the issue number or the PR #.I did not yet create a fragment for this. Happy to get some feedback on this PR first!