My current strategy is to add my requirements (generally pinned) to setup.py and then have a requirements.txt file that specifies particular versions.
The workflow I've migrated to is: pipenv install "-e ." and pipenv install "-e .[test]" --dev. Looking at requests's Pipfile this seems to be the same approach, with a couple caveats / notes:
- the dev dependencies contains more installation requirements than requests[text]. This is probably fine, as I assume it means you want even more packages installed when developing
requests(?). - your dependencies are
"-e ." = {extras = ["socks"]}. This appears to be handcoded, as my output looks like:"e1839a8" = {path = ".", editable = true}. Is the first approach better? I.e. should I be manually adding"-e ." = {}to my dependencies?
dfee
All 8 comments
no, your approach is fine. you can add extras if you want.
kennethreitz42
on 25 Sep 2017
looks like we have a bug when using the "e1839a8" = {path = ".", editable = true, extras=['anything']} syntax.
kennethreitz42
on 25 Sep 2017
Fixed the bug
kennethreitz42
on 25 Sep 2017
I've updated requests to use the proper and updated syntax.
kennethreitz42
on 25 Sep 2017
Make sure you're using latest though!
kennethreitz42
on 25 Sep 2017
Can you help me understand what "e1839a8" means? At first glance it looks like the short hash of something. But I'm not sure what.
dfee
on 25 Sep 2017
it's a short hash of the path you provided. we have to call it something. you can call it whatever you want, though.
kennethreitz42
on 25 Sep 2017
it's effectively nice filler content, that ensures no collisions.
kennethreitz42
on 25 Sep 2017
Related issues
jeyraof
路
3Comments
Californian
路
3Comments
ipmb
路
3Comments
johnjiang
路
3Comments
jerzyk
路
3Comments
Most helpful comment
Can you help me understand what "e1839a8" means? At first glance it looks like the short hash of something. But I'm not sure what.