-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Tracking issue for cleaning up python lib formulae #167905
Comments
Should probably keep |
I've opened an issue to point out a potential problems with the build process, specifically affecting python projects which have |
What is the reason for removing |
It's a library, not something that's useful on its own. People are better off adding it to their requirements.txt if they need it somewhere. |
FWIW, my pitch for python-packaging -- apparently now deprecated and soon to be removed due to #176511 -- is that I see it being used as part of peoples' meson builds, and the workaround for it not being part of the distribution is both annoying and non-obvious (I certainly wouldn't have done it correctly), and yet winds up being forced on everyone attempting to compile such packages, whether as a developer automating their build system or as a user who wants to one-off build a random project they checked out which uses meson. You can actually see this at work in the glib formula: instead of merely marking python-packaging as a build dependency, it instead must vendor a specific version of the package -- which already feels wrong, as this is something that is going to have to get updated, and yet is going to be more coupled to python than glib -- and then futz around with the PYTHON_PATH to inject it into the system python search path, as, apparently, doing this work using a virtual env and passing that separate python context to meson causes glib to not work correctly, per the giant comment in the formula. homebrew-core/Formula/g/glib.rb Lines 55 to 58 in 302c6d8
homebrew-core/Formula/g/glib.rb Lines 71 to 81 in 302c6d8
I also found a mention by a maintainer of meson (@eli-schwartz) in a discussion of what modules might be useful to include in a standalone copy of meson into which one cannot install additional dependencies--which, FWIW, seems to be the case with Homebrew now, given that python3 is externally managed and these packages that are normally used to accomplish the same goals are largely being deprecated--and packaging is specifically and narrowly called out as "probably a good thing to include" as it is apparently being commonly in various meson build scripts as a replacement for some useful functions from distutils. mesonbuild/meson#13007 (reply in thread)
@cho-m @woodruffw Is there any hope of getting a stay of execution on the python-packaging formula? |
The discussion above seems like good reasoning for this for me, but CC @Homebrew/core for thoughts. |
This seems like a very good reasoning for me along to have Really, anything we're repeatedly |
You mean resources where we have to mess with pythonpath might be eligible to be formulae right? Not just "anything that we resource a lot" because that used to be the strategy. |
Resources where we're having to write elaborate explanations and provide workarounds like this and we have helpful community members like @saurik taking the time to explain why. I don't think a "follow this rule and you don't have to think about it" approach is going to work in either direction (not that I'm claiming you're saying that either, to be clear). |
Un- |
A dedicated tracker for any tasks to handle based on decision in #157500.
For Homebrew/core:
prefix
to instead use virtualenvsExtras for Homebrew/brew:
--new
formulae, e.g. audit: check for Python-wide site-package usage brew#16663brew doctor
and--ignore-dependencies
"recommendation" for removed formulae to avoid users blindly running commandsQuick table based on 90-day install-on-request analytics data for formulae that may expose libs in
HOMEBREW_PREFIX/lib
. Also added whether the formula provides any files inbin
and non-pure python libs.installs
rank
usage
cmd?
libs
cryptography
cryptography
Decide if rename?
Table for completed tasks (i.e. merged PRs), excluding removals:
installs
rank
usage
cmd?
libs
cryptography
certifi
Collapsed table for removed formulae
installs
rank
usage
cmd?
libs
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: