Skip to content
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

Question about pyproject.toml syntax #120

Closed
adamjstewart opened this issue Dec 8, 2021 · 3 comments · Fixed by #121
Closed

Question about pyproject.toml syntax #120

adamjstewart opened this issue Dec 8, 2021 · 3 comments · Fixed by #121

Comments

@adamjstewart
Copy link
Contributor

The README for this project suggests using:

[build-system]
requires = ["jupyter_packaging~=0.10.0,<2"]
build-backend = "setuptools.build_meta"

However, doesn't ~=0.10.0 imply >=0.10.0,==0.10.*? So not only is the <2 unnecessary, it's also misleading since it suggests that version 0.11.0 or 1.X would work? I'm referring to this syntax specification.

@adamjstewart
Copy link
Contributor Author

The reason I ask is that a lot of other packages like jupyterlab and jupyter-server are using jupyter_packaging~=0.9,<2 in their pyproject.toml.

@blink1073
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @adamjstewart, good catch, mind submitting a PR to update the README?

@bollwyvl
Copy link

bollwyvl commented Dec 9, 2021

Thanks for all those!

I don't use (or encourage) ~ and ^ within the python/conda packaging space, though it seems unavoidable (if more principled) in the npm space (which has a much stricter version regex). My issues: the two operators have different meanings for different package managers/for different leading values 0.x vs 1.x/edge cases (alpha, etc) and don't actually save too many electrons vs concrete top and bottom pins. Indeed, as a project, we should be striving for things that work across major revision boundaries, eventually, if the upstreams are still supported... even if it takes a while to get there.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants