On 07/04/2016 02:43 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Tomas Orsava
> We have just removed the dependency generator from the proposal , see
> diff .
> The implementation of it (backported from RPM upstream) is significantly
> lacking: Python dependencies are most usually found in setup.py and
> requirements.txt files, whereas the dependency generator only takes
> dependencies from the .dist-info or .egg-info files. There, the requirements
> are often not listed at all, or if so, the listing can be incomplete.
> Such behavior, I believe, would serve only to confuse packagers due to it's
> highly unintuitive nature. It could be explained in the packaging
> guidelines, but would add a lot of complexity without adding significant
> (and consistent) benefits.
> Therefore the dependency generator will not be turned on, and was removed
> from the Fedora Change proposal.
Err, the reason it takes it from that information is because
requirements information is recorded in there during the %pyX_install
phase. It's exactly the same information. Today, most Python programs'
setup.py read the requirements.txt and record it in the info files
during install. It's more reliable that way because then it doesn't
have to figure out whether the requirements are in a requirements.txt
file, the setup.py file, or somewhere else. It's a consistent
location, and it eliminates test dependencies from being written in as
Oh! In that case, the documentation could be improved. :)
Have you tested it? Is it reliable?
And also, there have been some concerns about opting out:
Can the packager opt out of the dependency generator? There are cases
where that might be necessary.