Title use gp.recipe.pip and requirements.txt to manage dependencies using pip
Priority wish Status chatting
Project Code Milestone
Superseder Nosy List cwebber, jedoig, mlinksva, nkinkade, nyergler
Assigned To Keywords

Created on 2010-08-04.15:16:37 by cwebber, last changed 2010-08-04.17:23:12 by nyergler.

msg1993 (view) Author: nyergler Date: 2010-08-04.17:23:12
Removing superseder; this originally showed up in Issue 601, but does not
supersede it.
msg1992 (view) Author: nyergler Date: 2010-08-04.17:22:09
I think this still seems right to me, but I'm still bothered by the
fact that requirements aren't transitive (if that makes sense).  Or
were we talking about having a shared requirements file on the server
that defined where to get things from? Right now I think we should get
a little more experience under our belts before moving forward with
this.  So I guess I agree, but also agree with the classification of
this as a "wish", so am OK letting it sit while we fix bugs, etc.
msg1989 (view) Author: cwebber Date: 2010-08-04.15:16:37
In our tech all-hands Nathan Yergler described using gp.recipe.pip to manage
dependencies both in our packages and in our deployment meta-packages.

Part of the reason for this is the idea that "master" will thus become always
stable, and "next" will be next-in-line-but-not-released, with other branches
being for features-in-progress.  This way it is both easier to test our
development branches on dev/staging and also reduce the need for releasing eggs.

See also

(Nathan, does this seem right to you?)
Date User Action Args
2010-08-04 17:23:25nyerglerlinkissue601 superseder
2010-08-04 17:23:12nyerglersetmessages: + msg1993
superseder: - i18n release management tooling
2010-08-04 17:22:23nyerglersetassignedto: nyergler ->
2010-08-04 17:22:10nyerglersetproject: Code
status: unread -> chatting
messages: + msg1992
2010-08-04 15:16:37cwebbercreate