21–30 of 79 posts
Is it possible to publish Python code for others to use simply by putting a repo on a webserver? In other words, can someone put a line like this into their requirements.txt file? https://somewhere.com/some/git/repo.git
Is it possible to publish Python code for others to use simply by putting a repo on a webserver? In other words, can someone put a line like this into their requirements.txt file? https://somewhere.com/some/git/repo.git
Is it possible to publish Python code for others to use simply by putting a repo on a webserver? In other words, can someone put a line like this into their requirements.txt file? https://somewhere.com/some/git/repo.git
Packages are wheels? lolwut? > Wheels are the new standard of Python distribution and are intended to replace eggs. Ahhh... ???
Is it possible to publish Python code for others to use simply by putting a repo on a webserver? In other words, can someone put a line like this into their requirements.txt file? https://somewhere.com/some/git/repo.git
https://github.com/iree-org/iree-samples/blob/main/requireme...
You can do even better using GitHub releases: the GET for a releases page with assets (ie use inspector) functions as an index url. So you can have a repo that publishes wheels to a release called eg `latest` that can function as the index for that package/wheel. You can even have multiple repos that publish to a single such wheel repo release repo (using the ncipollo/release-action GHA).
Packages are wheels? lolwut? > Wheels are the new standard of Python distribution and are intended to replace eggs. Ahhh... ???
Python is rife with Monty Python references, such as "spam and eggs" in place of "foo and bar", so "egg" was a natural choice.
30 years later I still love programming but people given authority opting for cutesy names for critically important terms in the ecosystem should be severely limited in their options. Flakes, pills, wheels, eggs... Come on, people. I am willing to bet good money that it won't hurt you physically if you just call them "packages".
> I am willing to bet good money that it won't hurt you physically if you just call them "packages". So, "Packages are the new standard of distributing packages, and replace packages" is clearer to you?
This only outlines that the article is very niche and not very interesting to be posted for non-Python audience.
--- ORIGINAL COMMENT:
Need I explain that if you arrive at such a title you would have to reevaluate if it's worth posting at all? Apparently I need to explain it. ;)
This article is more or less pointless anyhow. Using better terminology would have made that clearer much earlier in the process IMO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which would make the article completely redundant, and that works for me. :D But let's be serious, they could have just said "99% of the top Python packages upgraded to our new packaging system" which would be much more informative and interesting title and would make me read it in full, as opposed to now when I just facepalmed.
But the Python ecosystem reinvents package systems every few years, so that headline is also not very useful.
Is it possible to publish Python code for others to use simply by putting a repo on a webserver? In other words, can someone put a line like this into their requirements.txt file? https://somewhere.com/some/git/repo.git
Yes, you can do this: https://pip.pypa.io/en/stable/topics/vcs-support/
Why is all the "wheels", "eggs", "PyPi" ... stuff needed then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well these are at least more or less known and widely used (though I agree if you never worked with Java that .JAR and .WAR will be confusing). But when a language ecosystem opts for cutesy niche names then they just end up confusing everybody, including some of their own users.
I think JAR (Java Archive) and WAR (Web Archive) make sense. But wheel? It's a wheel of cheese, because pypi used to be called cheeseshop? I mean sure, but doesn't it feel a bit like that 20-year-old tatoo that you got during your teens that you got mixed feelings about today? My suggestion: Call them pypacks -- extension: .pyp