Lock requirements enhancement #972
Conversation
| @@ -2004,9 +2026,10 @@ def uninstall( | |||
| @click.option('--python', default=False, nargs=1, help="Specify which version of Python virtualenv should use.") | |||
| @click.option('--verbose', is_flag=True, default=False, help="Verbose mode.") | |||
| @click.option('--requirements', '-r', is_flag=True, default=False, help="Generate output compatible with requirements.txt.") | |||
| @click.option('--dev', '-d', is_flag=True, default=False, help="Generate output compatible with requirements.txt for the development dependencies.") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@erinxocon I think with --dev it includes also normal packages? Should change this text to "Include dev packages into requirements.txt output"? Now it makes one think that only dev packages will be outputted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, I think my assumption is wrong, as you wrote:
pipenv lock -r -d will give you just the development deps and development vcs deps
Ok, then the help text is according to this specification.
Apparently it's impossible to create such requirements.txt files now, that would include both standard and dev packages. I don't have use case for that, so I think it's ok. Someone else might want that, though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The current functionality separates them. --dev does only development dependencies, and -r only does anything listed under the default section! Is this not what was needed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the all packages is needed I can add it at a later time!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The current functionality separates them. --dev does only development dependencies, and -r only does anything listed under the default section! Is this not what was needed?
Indeed, this change should fulfill my needs. Thanks :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In this case is that the wanted use case though? I'll let my fellow contributors put in their 2 cents!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So to clarify, I needed requirements.txt file that excludes dev packages. After the change you've made here, I can do that with pipenv lock -r as you've instructed. So yeah, my use is now supported.
I have no opinion if pipenv lock -r -d should include only dev packages or also dev packages. I personally have no use case for neither. I was just pointing out that there's now slight inconsistency in API, compared to install and update. So you might want to consider changing --dev behavior here accordingly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I appreciate the input @tuukkamustonen! A very keen eye on the api discrepancies!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems --dev in pipenv lock -r --dev should be consistent with pipenv install --dev and pipenv update --dev indeed. In the future, if there's a need, additonal flag like --only-dev could be added to pipenv lock -r.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just came here to post a bug stating that lock -r -d only outputs dev dependencies. In isolation, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the current behavior, but the fact that lock -d is inconsistent with install -d and update -d makes it seem like a bug. Not only that, but if I run pipenv lock -h, the help text for --dev says "Install both develop and default packages.", further adding to the confusion.
|
@piotr-dobrogost @erinxocon @tuukkamustonen I feel it’s not worth getting too sidetracked over this one. It is a small inconsistency and I like the —dev-only suggestion to maintain similar functionality. Erin: stop giving the people what they want! Then they will have it and we won’t have any more things to do :) |
Addresses #942