-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 652
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
path forward for pip-style vcs or url identifiers? #2679
Comments
Supported via the fact that pex now delegates to pip. |
Not quite. See #3063 (comment). |
@Eric-Arellano : Do they both still need to be open, or can we track this with #3063? |
Fair, I think #3063 covers enough of this. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
This is already a todo [1] but I was unsure about the right approach. Pip has it's own code [2] to support this and does not appear to be part of a shared packaging library.
(A) Would depending on pip directly be okay?
(B) If not, is vendoring/forking the pip code acceptable?
[1] https://github.com/pantsbuild/pants/blob/master/src/python/pants/backend/python/python_requirement.py#L34
[2] https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/13d43e3af8b5c8e8c7c66dde8a9f76b340697c3e/pip/vcs/git.py
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: