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

Python package dependency management for building/development #56

Closed
jbusche opened this issue Feb 26, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #116
Closed

Python package dependency management for building/development #56

jbusche opened this issue Feb 26, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #116

Comments

@jbusche
Copy link
Collaborator

jbusche commented Feb 26, 2024

There's a problem with the current requirements.txt method as it pulls in too many requirements for CI/CD. We want to enable users to install minimal set of dependencies needed for functioning of the repository and to perform tuning techniques. Other dependencies should be optional.

This issue is to explore what best optional dependency framework to use to ensure install is light-weight.

Tasks include:

  1. Explore how to enable optional dependencies - what are best practices open source repositories use
  2. Add that framework to this repository with associated documentation
@Ssukriti
Copy link
Collaborator

some ideas from @hickeyma and Fabian is to use https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/specifications/pyproject-toml/

@hickeyma
Copy link
Collaborator

@jbusche There isn't a problems with requirements files per say. It is just that the implement optional dependencies using requirements files is clunky as you have to have separate files. The Python packaging provides a cleaner method where you can specify optional dependencies.

@jbusche
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jbusche commented Mar 2, 2024

OK, added pr #68 that hopefully addresses the issue...

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants