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

Add support for new environment marker usages #3098

Merged

Conversation

uranusjr
Copy link
Contributor

@uranusjr uranusjr commented Jan 9, 2018

Ref pypa/pipenv#1229.

Setuptools added a new syntax in 36.2.1 for conditional requirements. This is recommended in the documentation, and works better with dependency resolution tools that do not actually install the package.

I’m having trouble deciding whether this should be a bugfix or feature. Any suggestions?


  • Add a new news fragment into the changelog folder
    • name it $issue_id.$type for example (588.bugfix)
    • if you don't have an issue_id change it to the pr id after creating the pr
    • ensure type is one of removal, feature, bugfix, vendor, doc or trivial
    • Make sure to use full sentences with correct case and punctuation, for example: "Fix issue with non-ascii contents in doctest text files."
  • Target: for bugfix, vendor, doc or trivial fixes, target master; for removals or features target features;
  • Make sure to include reasonable tests for your change if necessary

Unless your change is a trivial or a documentation fix (e.g., a typo or reword of a small section) please:

  • Add yourself to AUTHORS, in alphabetical order;

@uranusjr uranusjr force-pushed the pep426-setuptools-36.2.1 branch from b674a7b to 9923b51 Compare January 9, 2018 06:24
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 92.565% when pulling 9923b51 on uranusjr:pep426-setuptools-36.2.1 into 794fb19 on pytest-dev:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 92.565% when pulling 9923b51 on uranusjr:pep426-setuptools-36.2.1 into 794fb19 on pytest-dev:master.

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member

LGTM, but I will defer to @RonnyPfannschmidt because he's more knowledgeable about setuptools than I am. 😁

@RonnyPfannschmidt
Copy link
Member

it looks lgtm, but based on the surrounding changelog the version used is incorrect

based on the change log it was introduced in v36.2.0, incorrect in .1 and fixed in .2 - so the presumed support should start at 36.2.2

@uranusjr uranusjr force-pushed the pep426-setuptools-36.2.1 branch from 9923b51 to 432dbcf Compare January 9, 2018 13:32
@uranusjr
Copy link
Contributor Author

uranusjr commented Jan 9, 2018

Changed the version to 36.2.2, and added a link to the change log. I also fixed the other link to change log since it’s broken.

@uranusjr uranusjr force-pushed the pep426-setuptools-36.2.1 branch from 432dbcf to b256cd2 Compare January 9, 2018 13:34
@RonnyPfannschmidt
Copy link
Member

lovely, i'll wait for the ci to pass then i'll merge

good job 👍

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 92.565% when pulling b256cd2 on uranusjr:pep426-setuptools-36.2.1 into 794fb19 on pytest-dev:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 92.565% when pulling b256cd2 on uranusjr:pep426-setuptools-36.2.1 into 794fb19 on pytest-dev:master.

@RonnyPfannschmidt RonnyPfannschmidt merged commit a8d3d32 into pytest-dev:master Jan 9, 2018
@RonnyPfannschmidt
Copy link
Member

merged, the failures are unrelated

thanks gain 👍

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.

4 participants