Skip to content

Dependency tree with requirements.txt #753

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

Closed
mjtorn opened this issue Dec 19, 2012 · 3 comments
Closed

Dependency tree with requirements.txt #753

mjtorn opened this issue Dec 19, 2012 · 3 comments
Labels
auto-locked Outdated issues that have been locked by automation

Comments

@mjtorn
Copy link

mjtorn commented Dec 19, 2012

Hi!

I'm trying to accomplish a purely Github-based deployment scheme for multiple packages in private repos.

If setup.py / install_requires knew about Github, I might be able to use only that and preserve requirements.txt for bootstrapping an environment. This is not the case, however, and I prefer pip and requirements.txt anyway :)

So the situation is package foo has a requirements.txt which goes all the way to

-e git+ssh://[email protected]/.../foodb.git#egg=foodb

Now that package's requirements.txt is not considered.

Wouldn't it be nice if there was an option like

-e git+ssh://[email protected]/.../foodb.git#egg=foodb -r foodb/requirements.txt

to make it possible to install these deps?

@mjtorn
Copy link
Author

mjtorn commented Dec 19, 2012

The -r in my example would look for the relative-path requirements.txt after installation. It could be something else as well, but that or using an ssh url – -r git+ssh://.../requirements.txt – would be clean and not require writing a client for github raw urls and their tokens.

@dstufft
Copy link
Member

dstufft commented Jan 30, 2014

I feel pretty strongly that this is an incredibly bad idea.

@dstufft dstufft closed this as completed Jan 30, 2014
@mjtorn
Copy link
Author

mjtorn commented Jan 30, 2014

I'm not sure I agree with it being an incredibly bad idea. Surely there are things to consider when resolving dependencies, so it wouldn't be easy.

This hasn't been a real issue in ages, though, and I forgot all about it :D It's easy enough to work with a flat requirements.txt which is crafted in development and deployed with configuration management.

@lock lock bot added the auto-locked Outdated issues that have been locked by automation label Jun 5, 2019
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 5, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
auto-locked Outdated issues that have been locked by automation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants