You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Great to see this feature is now available, thanks. Also great that this neatly generalizes the dev-dependencies in a compatible way :-)
I've read through the documentation, and am left with a few questions:
After reading this section, I wonder: What's the difference between poetry install --default and a plain poetry install? Does the former install only dependencies, and the latter also the package itself? Or is there another reason for --default to exist?
How do dependency groups interact with extras? From the docs, it seems that these two features now coexist but are completely separate? Wouldn't it be possible to also integrate these? Essentially, AFAICS, extras are just optional dependency groups, so it would be nice if they could be treated (and specified) as such? That would mean that --with and --extras become essentially the same option (--extras could be deprecated maybe), and extras could be specified using the new dependency group syntax (and the [tool.poetry.extras] section and optional attribute on individual dependencies could also become deprecated, I think). I might be missing some subtle differences that prevent this, though?
Great to see this feature is now available, thanks. Also great that this neatly generalizes the dev-dependencies in a compatible way :-)
I've read through the documentation, and am left with a few questions:
poetry install --default
and a plainpoetry install
? Does the former install only dependencies, and the latter also the package itself? Or is there another reason for--default
to exist?--with
and--extras
become essentially the same option (--extras
could be deprecated maybe), and extras could be specified using the new dependency group syntax (and the[tool.poetry.extras]
section andoptional
attribute on individual dependencies could also become deprecated, I think). I might be missing some subtle differences that prevent this, though?Originally posted by @matthijskooijman in #1644 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: