| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Before this patch, the documentation suggested the package authors to
declare a fixed set of hooks inherited from setuptools. But this
approach turned out non-future proof. Over time, as `setuptools` added
support for editable installs, it introduced new hooks per PEP 660.
But if one were to follow the outlined example, they'd end up with an
in-tree build backend that does not support editable installs, nor
would it re-export any hooks that might be added in future versions of
setuptools, implementing any new standards that may emerge over time.
This change demonstrates an approach that would allow the thin wrapper
authors to get the new hooks that setuptools may add over time.
Ref: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/79606#discussion_r1080753862
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
| |
Co-authored-by: Anderson Bravalheri <andersonbravalheri+github@gmail.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Mainly grammar/style tweaks... which turned into a few more thoughts:
About this statement: "decide which program to use to 'build from source' (the default is ``setuptools``)."
I think 'default' conveys the wrong impression here when it is explaining the new way of doing things. PEP517 says, "(build) tools should revert to the legacy behaviour of running setup.py" Maybe a footnote would be better saying it is a fallback, for backward compatibility. (But, all the same, this is interesting information that now explains to me why 'py -m build' worked before I had tried using a pyproject.toml file.)
Line 37: ``build_meta`` implements ``setuptools``'s build system support.
This seems out of place, and doesn't make sense. build_meta hasn't been mentioned yet in this article. Maybe this sentence could go before line 61.
Line 26-28: This seems like low-level detail that is out of place in this article. If you want to keep it, maybe add a note that the default directory is dist\.
**The "bullet items" under the PEP517 section aren't formatting correctly in the Preview. Please check that I haven't messed anything up there in the final render.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- Extract `depencency_liks` section to a new file:
`deprecated/dependency_links.rst`
- Add note about directly URLs not being accepted in PyPI.
- Simplify intro about build system requirement.
- Simplify intro about optional dependencies.
- Fix confusion in example about "Project" and "Package".
- "Demote" section about extras in entry-points to a note.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
- Tense changed in first paragraph: should be either past or present; present seems fair since a lot of people still use or even need `setup.py`.
- Line 20: missing 'the'
- Under 'How to use it?' I added a Python file to the source tree; seems like the sort of thing a beginner could get confused about ("where does my code go?").
- A couple of small typos.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| | |
Docs: Add instructions about `build_meta` wrappers as alternative to dynamic `setup_requires`
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This dependency is exposed automatically by setuptools and the users
do not need to declare it explicitly — it will be installed by
PEP 517 front-ends automatically, when building wheels.
|
| |/ |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
