Skip to content
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

Implement pipfile support #4783

Closed
wants to merge 14 commits into from

Conversation

stsewd
Copy link
Member

@stsewd stsewd commented Oct 18, 2018

Based on #4740

Implemented following the schema on #4782, I tested it locally with some projects, still need to test with more, but the internet gods aren't happy with me right now

@agjohnson agjohnson changed the base branch from master to santos/implement-extend-install-option December 5, 2018 23:22
@agjohnson
Copy link
Contributor

I've reset the base to make this reviewable. #4740 is a very large PR and is difficult to review at this point. We'll reset the base once #4740 is merged.

@agjohnson agjohnson added the Status: blocked Issue is blocked on another issue label Dec 5, 2018
@agjohnson agjohnson added this to the 2.10 milestone Dec 5, 2018
@agjohnson
Copy link
Contributor

Holding off on review for now, this needs some tests still. If the underlying PR has calmed down, feel free to continue here.

@agjohnson agjohnson added Needed: tests Tests are required PR: work in progress Pull request is not ready for full review labels Dec 5, 2018
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 11, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #4783 into master will decrease coverage by 1.86%.
The diff coverage is 12.9%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4783      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage    78.6%   76.73%   -1.87%     
==========================================
  Files         167      159       -8     
  Lines       10233    10034     -199     
  Branches     1286     1263      -23     
==========================================
- Hits         8044     7700     -344     
- Misses       1859     1998     +139     
- Partials      330      336       +6
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
readthedocs/config/config.py 95.86% <0%> (-2.95%) ⬇️
readthedocs/config/models.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
readthedocs/doc_builder/python_environments.py 78.44% <14.28%> (-5.77%) ⬇️
readthedocs/search/utils.py 0% <0%> (-53.66%) ⬇️
readthedocs/search/parse_json.py 57.14% <0%> (-11.52%) ⬇️
readthedocs/restapi/urls.py 80% <0%> (-9.66%) ⬇️
readthedocs/restapi/utils.py 90.99% <0%> (-9.01%) ⬇️
readthedocs/core/utils/tasks/permission_checks.py 28.57% <0%> (-8.93%) ⬇️
readthedocs/core/utils/__init__.py 74.73% <0%> (-8.41%) ⬇️
readthedocs/core/views/__init__.py 71.01% <0%> (-8.24%) ⬇️
... and 158 more

@readthedocs readthedocs deleted a comment from codecov bot Dec 11, 2018
@stsewd stsewd removed the Needed: tests Tests are required label Dec 17, 2018
@stsewd stsewd mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2019
@stsewd stsewd changed the base branch from santos/implement-extend-install-option to master January 23, 2019 00:01
@stsewd stsewd removed Status: blocked Issue is blocked on another issue PR: work in progress Pull request is not ready for full review labels Jan 23, 2019
@stsewd stsewd requested a review from a team January 23, 2019 00:25
@agjohnson agjohnson added the Feature New feature label Jan 25, 2019
@humitos
Copy link
Member

humitos commented Mar 28, 2019

What's the status of this? Is it just waiting for review and QA?

@stsewd
Copy link
Member Author

stsewd commented Mar 28, 2019

Yeah, review mostly. There some parts where I want other opinions, like how to put custom paths (not root). I'm using a env variable right now, but with sphinx we just change the cwd, this feels like hiding info to the user, but feels better than showing the env variable in the command. And pipenv doesn't have something like --file=

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented May 12, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon label May 12, 2019
@RohanNagar
Copy link

Any updates? This shouldn't be marked as stale.

@stale stale bot removed the Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon label May 12, 2019
@stsewd
Copy link
Member Author

stsewd commented May 13, 2019

@RohanNagar yes, this is still valid, but we are going to prioritize other work before. Like #1083.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jun 27, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon label Jun 27, 2019
@stsewd stsewd added Priority: low Low priority and removed Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon labels Jun 27, 2019
@jmsmkn
Copy link

jmsmkn commented Jun 28, 2019

Thank you for the excellent service that rtd provides! It's invaluable to us and our users. Is there anything that I can do to help get this merged? I've not contributed here before but I have experience with Django and Pipenv.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Aug 12, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon label Aug 12, 2019
@dojutsu-user dojutsu-user removed the Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon label Aug 12, 2019
@ericholscher
Copy link
Member

I've seen some complaints that pipenv/pipfile don't seem to be actively maintained or pushing forward currently. I think I might be +1 on closing this until we see it being adopted as an official standard. I really don't want to be supporting experimental, slow package installation.

@stsewd
Copy link
Member Author

stsewd commented Aug 13, 2019

I also think that pipenv should adopt https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0517/, like poetry did, that way installing the project with pip should be enough

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Sep 27, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon label Sep 27, 2019
@saadmk11 saadmk11 removed the Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon label Sep 27, 2019
@humitos humitos added the Needed: design decision A core team decision is required label Oct 30, 2019
@humitos
Copy link
Member

humitos commented May 25, 2021

I've seen some complaints that pipenv/pipfile don't seem to be actively maintained or pushing forward currently

At the beginning of this year, they opened this issue pypa/pipenv#4130


I'm closing this PR for now. It's a pity that we may lose all the work and time involved here, but it seems it's for the best. We can revisit in the future if we feel it's needed.

On the other hand, I think this use case could be handled by advanced users by overriding the build.jobs.install proposed in #8190 (or similar) instead of building this at Read the Docs core.

@humitos humitos closed this May 25, 2021
@stsewd stsewd deleted the implement-pipfile-support branch May 25, 2021 16:20
@astrojuanlu
Copy link
Contributor

On the topic of Pipenv being still the officially recommended tool, I opened this issue pypa/packaging.python.org#912

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feature New feature Needed: design decision A core team decision is required Priority: low Low priority
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants