Fix: edits to the packaging section of the guide ✨ #82
Conversation
|
i will review this one as well - again my apologies. i normally am quicker at reviewing pr's but somehow i just missed the notifications! many thanks 👐 for this pr and again welcome to our organization!! we appreciate these types of contributions greatly! May I ask how you found us?? |
|
Thanks for accepting my first PR! I first found pyOpenSci on Mastodon where I immediately followed after a couple of great posts. I then saw that you were sprinting at PyConUS, which unfortunately I couldn't make this year, but still wanted to help contribute to; so I just pulled up the official site and started reading. I think this is a really important resource for the community and you all have managed to launch something that really works. Despite not working in scientific institutions I have already highly recommended this resource to several peers. |
| @@ -395,7 +403,7 @@ Lock files| ✅ | Poetry creates a **poetry.lock** file that you can use if you | |||
| Publish to PyPI and test PyPI|✅|Poetry supports publishing to both test PyPI and PyPI | |||
| Version Control based versioning|✅ | The plugin [Poetry dynamic versioning](https://github.com/mtkennerly/poetry-dynamic-versioning) supports versioning using git tags with Poetry. | |||
| Version bumping| ✅ | Poetry supports you bumping the version of your package using standard semantic version terms patch; minor; major | |||
| Follows current packaging standards|✖✅|Poetry does not quite support current packaging standards for adding metadata to the **pyproject.toml** file but plans to fix this in an upcoming release. | |||
| Follows current packaging standards|✔️|Poetry does not quite support current packaging standards for adding metadata to the **pyproject.toml** file but plans to fix this in an upcoming release. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ucodery did poetry release a new version that now supports standardized add of content to pyproject.toml files? this was intention a x/check because at the time of publication they still didn't actually support current peps on this but the plan was for them to release a new version that did in the future.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No it did not add support. I was just confused by the double entry. I did the same for Hatch editable mode, at first thinking it was a typo, not realizing it meant both/ neither until I read this one too.
I changed it from check in a green box to just check. But probably I didn't help clarify anything.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
2.0 is the release that is supposed to start supporting proper standards. I believe it’s nowhere near soon.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, that is also my understanding. Version 1.5 has only just come out, and I don't know any timeframe for 2.0.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok great. yup i had asked them about this and they (poetry maintainers) were not sure when that release would happen. Henry knows much more than I do. i'll add that x back. i know it's a bit confusing but it's a space where what they are doing is not TERRIBLE but it's also not quite aligned with current standards /best practices.
package-structure-code/pyproject-toml-python-package-metadata.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
package-structure-code/pyproject-toml-python-package-metadata.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
I have removed the addition of wheel to |
|
thank you @ucodery !!! |
| @@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ include: | |||
| - LICENSE.txt | |||
| - README.md | |||
|
|
|||
| <!-- TODO: CHANGELOG is not mentioned in either documentation nor peer review --> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oooh good catch @ucodery i'll open an issue about this now so we can be sure to add this. see https://github.com/pyOpenSci/software-peer-review/issues/219
No description provided.