Skip to content

Conversation

@okurz
Copy link
Member

@okurz okurz commented Jan 8, 2026

  • feat(ci): Simplify deps setup with uv
  • feat(pyproject.toml): Add config for proper python package paths
  • feat(Makefile): Add more Python related targets using "uv"
  • feat(pyproject.toml): Add dependencies in preparation for typecheck+maintainability checks
  • feat(pyproject.toml): Enable dependencies for modern scripts (typer+httpx)
  • fix(test_trigger_bisect_jobs): fix "path" style issue

@okurz okurz force-pushed the feature/bash_to_python5 branch from d914509 to e392ac5 Compare January 8, 2026 08:55
Copy link
Contributor

@Martchus Martchus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are these dependencies already required? If not I wouldn't separate adding them from the actual changes requiring them.

- uses: astral-sh/setup-uv@v7
with:
enable-cache: true
- run: uv sync
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would expect to find also uv.lock in the repo. otherwise what the us is syncing?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

same is in https://github.com/openSUSE/qem-bot/blob/master/.github/workflows/ci.yml#L22 this installs all necessary dependencies

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

which also doesnt have a uv.lock. which means that it creates a new one each time is run likely. Both repos should contain the uv.lock. Then the ci should see this and run exactly the same as you run in your workstation

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think so as well, uv.lock is necessary for reproducible Python environments.

@okurz
Copy link
Member Author

okurz commented Jan 8, 2026

Are these dependencies already required? If not I wouldn't separate adding them from the actual changes requiring them.

the dependencies would only be required in #499

Copy link
Contributor

@Martchus Martchus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Then I say we should add the dependencies only as needed. At least for me it makes no sense to approve this independently from the actual code that I haven't looked at.

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 this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants