Conversation
sbidoul
force-pushed
the
pin-build-deps-sbi
branch
from
e47503b to
47b74af
Compare
I've created a similiar build step in my work environment, for maximum reproducability I would reccomend |
sbidoul
force-pushed
the
pin-build-deps-sbi
branch
from
47b74af to
8e6c4e1
Compare
webknjaz
left a comment
webknjaz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's a good start if it works for you. Not exactly how I'd structure it, but that's inconsequential.
As a future improvement, it would be good to have a nox session wrapping whatever generation command is used.
I've been playing with comprehensive pip constraint-based "DIY lock files" to the extremes. Here's some things I've got (sharing for the record, it's much more than what's in the scope of this PR):
There was a problem hiding this comment.
.txt.in? The typical convention is just .in. Dependabot will recognize pairs of files if they have the same base name.
| @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ | |||
| build | |||
| twine | |||
| setuptools | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So this duplicates what's in pyproject.toml. Instead, perhaps make use of --all-build-deps to retrieve it from there? https://pip-tools.readthedocs.io/en/stable/#maximizing-reproducibility.
| build | ||
| twine |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These two are on the front-end side, so I'd keep them separate.
| # This file was autogenerated by uv via the following command: | ||
| # uv pip compile --only-binary :all: --generate-hashes build-requirements.txt.in |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does uv support the same mechanism of retrieving PEP 517 build deps as pip-tools? Also, can the settings be put into a config? (.pip-tools.toml, for example)
| "--python", | ||
| build_python, | ||
| "install", | ||
| "-r", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps, document why it's not a constraint?
| "-r", | |
| "-r", # can't be constraint dues to regression @ https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/9243 |
| build_python, | ||
| "-m", | ||
| "twine", | ||
| "check", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(not really related to the refactoring in this PR, but it should always be strict — would be good to put into a separate PR, I suppose)
| "check", | |
| "check", | |
| "--strict", |
| build_python, | ||
| "-m", | ||
| "build", | ||
| "--no-isolation", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, is this because of PIP_CONSTRAINT not working with hashes and resolvelib?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So if not for #9243, #4582 (comment) could be used instead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In my view PIP_CONSTRAINT used with build is a bit of a fragile hack. I find no-isolation more explicit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@sbidoul would you mind recording that @ pypa/build#292 ?
| "tests": "tests/requirements.txt", | ||
| "common-wheels": "tests/requirements-common_wheels.txt", | ||
| } | ||
| HERE = Path(__file__).parent |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about a descriptive name?
| HERE = Path(__file__).parent | |
| GIT_REPOSITORY_ROOT = Path(__file__).parent |
|
Closing. Will update the nox build session when #13048 has landed. |
3 participants
Coming from the suggestions in #13048, this is a little experiment to see how pinning build deps looks like and see what @pypa/pip-committers and others think about this.
Here we pin build dependencies with pip-compile, use that to create a build environment with the build dependencies and nothing else, and build using
--no-isolationto make sure (hopefully?) that nothing unpinned is downloaded during the build process.Notably, at this point nox is not pinned. I have also not investigated what nox downloads when creating a session.
cc/ @sethmlarson @webknjaz