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
pip.parse() (not a rule, but the module extension tag)
Description
Just putting this out there to gather feedback and see if it's worth implementing myself. I use Python as a pretty minor part of my polyglot Bazel codebase, and it has a single PyPI dependency. Call me petty, but I just don't like having to put that 1 dependency in its own requirements.txt file when all my other dependencies are listed directly in MODULE.bazel.
Describe the solution you'd like
Is there any appetite for adding a new parameter to pip.parse() called requirements (as an alternative to requirements_lock) which is just a Starlark list of strings that get parsed as though they were the lines of a requirements.txt file? This would be kinda nice for really simple cases like mine, but perhaps "not recommended" for larger Python projects.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Alternatives already exist, but if the maintainers would welcome a PR to this effect, then I can draft one up.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'd be opposed to this idea simply because Bazel claims to provide reproducible builds, and without pinning/locking requirements you could get different transitive dependencies when you rebuild at the same commit.
I don't see how that's relevant. Hashes should still be locked in MODULE.bazel.lock. The only difference would be that, rather than a requirements.txt file who's only contents are e.g. numpy==1.2.3, you would instead have a Starlark list who's only contents are numpy==1.2.3. It seems to me like requirements_lock is a bit of a misnomer because requirements.txt has never been a lock file in that sense. All the locking information seems to go in MODULE.bazel.lock.
🚀 feature request
Relevant Rules
pip.parse()
(not a rule, but the module extension tag)Description
Just putting this out there to gather feedback and see if it's worth implementing myself. I use Python as a pretty minor part of my polyglot Bazel codebase, and it has a single PyPI dependency. Call me petty, but I just don't like having to put that 1 dependency in its own
requirements.txt
file when all my other dependencies are listed directly inMODULE.bazel
.Describe the solution you'd like
Is there any appetite for adding a new parameter to
pip.parse()
calledrequirements
(as an alternative torequirements_lock
) which is just a Starlark list of strings that get parsed as though they were the lines of arequirements.txt
file? This would be kinda nice for really simple cases like mine, but perhaps "not recommended" for larger Python projects.Describe alternatives you've considered
Alternatives already exist, but if the maintainers would welcome a PR to this effect, then I can draft one up.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: