-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Add data_files support in setup.cfg #1520
Conversation
setuptools/tests/test_config.py
Outdated
) | ||
|
||
with get_dist(tmpdir) as dist: | ||
assert dist.data_files == [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe this is failing because dist.data_files
gets parsed first to a dict (with arbitrary order on Py < 3.6), then turned into this key/value list thing.
I would look at what the other tests do, but I think a quick fix would be this:
expected = {
'cfg': ['a/b.conf', 'c/d.conf'],
'data': ['e/f.dat', 'g/h.dat']
}
with get_dist(tmpdir) as dist:
# Order independent comparison
assert dict(dist.data_files) == expected
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks a lot for your suggestion! I completely forgot about that. I'll commit the fix into this my branch.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I committed the fix based on your suggestion but data type of expected result is kept.
In the test case, dist.data_files needs to be sorted because the current implementation loads the configuration files as a dictionary with arbitrary order on Python < 3.6.
This adds the `[options.data_files]` section to the existing setup.cfg example.
51b446d
to
b77ea8c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've rebased this branch against master and squashed together the fixup commits, plus touched up some of the commit messages and the changelog entry, so everything looks good to me.
Thanks @ssato for your PR!
The documentation should be updated. |
@benoit-pierre Good catch, I guess we need to add it to this table. Anywhere else? |
Yes, and I would add a new column to the table mention the minimum supported version. |
@ssato If you want to update the documentation, please do a force-pull from your branch, since I've rewritten the PR's history since your last commit, and that will cause conflicts. |
@pganssle Thanks a lot for the cleanups! It looks much better ;-) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think there's still an outstanding request to update the documentation. @ssato would you do that please?
@jaraco @benoit-pierre Normally I'd block on getting an update, but given that we're doing a sprint this weekend, I'm tempted to just merge this as-is and leave the documentation update as an easy If no one takes it at the sprints this weekend, I can do it myself on Monday, but frankly it's nice to have some very simple fixes that you can use as a demo PR for new contributors. |
Works for me. @pganssle Would you file that ticket? |
Filed #1522. |
Since |
Summary of changes
These commits add data_files support in setup.cfg, discussed in the issue #1189, such like the following.
I think it may close #1189.
Pull Request Checklist