-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 615
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 development dependencies #4036
Conversation
36652ba
to
cae2046
Compare
@@ -28,6 +36,7 @@ pub struct Metadata { | |||
pub requires_dist: Vec<pypi_types::Requirement>, | |||
pub requires_python: Option<VersionSpecifiers>, | |||
pub provides_extras: Vec<ExtraName>, | |||
pub dependency_groups: BTreeMap<ExtraName, Vec<pypi_types::Requirement>>, |
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.
I find the terminology here really confusing -- that we have both extras and dependency groups -- but, what can we do? I'm honestly considering using dev_dependencies
everywhere internally instead of dependency groups.
cae2046
to
a5d239b
Compare
da22d23
to
bccdad9
Compare
bccdad9
to
7b3e195
Compare
I decided to rework the terminology (internally) to center on development dependencies (even though it still supports groups internally), since that's the only thing they're actually used for right now. |
f3897ad
to
c49007b
Compare
c49007b
to
52970c1
Compare
Summary
Externally, development dependencies are currently structured as a flat list of PEP 580-compatible requirements:
When locking, we lock all development dependencies; when syncing, users can provide
--dev
.Internally, though, we model them as dependency groups, similar to Poetry, PDM, and PEP 735. This enables us to change out the user-facing frontend without changing the internal implementation, once we've decided how these should be exposed to users.
A few important decisions encoded in the implementation (which we can change later):