Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 1:08:44 PM UTC-8 Matthias Koeppe wrote: On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 12:46:01 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: I don't think the docs describe the interaction between package-version.txt and install-requires.txt (and between potential version constraints in

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 1:08:44 PM UTC-8 Matthias Koeppe wrote: On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 12:46:01 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: I don't think the docs describe the interaction between package-version.txt and install-requires.txt (and between potential version constraints in

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

(Obviously I meant to say "does NOT set a version 'constraint'.) On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 9:31:23 AM UTC-8 Matthias Koeppe wrote: Tobias, you must have missed that making the package standard does set a version "constraint". Those are set in "install-requires.txt" files, and in

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 12:46:01 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 8:27 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 11:51:46 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: The purpose of "install-requires.txt" is rather unclear, especially in presence of

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 8:27 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 11:51:46 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > The purpose of "install-requires.txt" is rather unclear, especially in > presence > of "package-version.txt". What is it even doing, in the presence of hard >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 11:51:46 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: The purpose of "install-requires.txt" is rather unclear, especially in presence of "package-version.txt". What is it even doing, in the presence of hard version numbers in package-version.txt ? Just so I know where I

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 7:34 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 10:35:45 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 5:31 PM Matthias Koeppe > wrote: > > On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 5:47:46 AM UTC-8 tobia...@gmx.de wrote: >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 10:35:45 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 5:31 PM Matthias Koeppe https://groups.google.com/>> wrote: On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 5:47:46 AM UTC-8 tobia...@gmx.de wrote: +1 for the one-line change of the type from "optional" to

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 5:31 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > Tobias, you must have missed that making the package standard does set a > version "constraint". Those are set in "install-requires.txt" files, and in > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37301 you can see that the packages > remain

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

Tobias, you must have missed that making the package standard does set a version "constraint". Those are set in "install-requires.txt" files, and in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37301 you can see that the packages remain unconstrained. On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 5:47:46 AM UTC-8

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

+1 for the one-line change of the type from "optional" to "standard". -1 on everything ("standard pip" or "standard wheel") that involves an unnecessary version constraint and an explicit declaration of the runtime dependencies. On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 4:51:45 PM UTC+8 Dima

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

I have made it clear under what condition you can count my vote as +1. To make it clear: it is -1 if the condition is not met. On 17 February 2024 04:26:14 GMT, Matthias Koeppe wrote: >Note that posting a proposal here on sage-devel to make the packages >standard followed the policies of our

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

Note that posting a proposal here on sage-devel to make the packages standard followed the policies of our project. "optional packages stay in that status for at least a year, after which they can be proposed to be included as standard packages in Sage. For this a GitHub PR is opened with the

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On 16 February 2024 23:33:48 GMT, Matthias Koeppe wrote: >On Friday, February 16, 2024 at 1:25:13 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >>On Friday, February 16, 2024 at 9:38:16 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: >My vote for is conditional on them remaining pip packages, and that's not >what your

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On Friday, February 16, 2024 at 1:25:13 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: >On Friday, February 16, 2024 at 9:38:16 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: My vote for is conditional on them remaining pip packages, and that's not what your PRs do. I'll count that as 0. -- You received this message

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

On 16 February 2024 20:05:51 GMT, Matthias Koeppe wrote: >On Friday, February 16, 2024 at 9:38:16 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >It seems you had one vote for, and one against. Is it enough to declare >these packages accepted as standard now? > > >We haven't counted votes yet. >(Where do