Skip to content

build(deps): Move setuptools to requirements.txt (from dev reqs) #4291

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 30, 2024
Merged

build(deps): Move setuptools to requirements.txt (from dev reqs) #4291

merged 2 commits into from
Jul 30, 2024

Conversation

cpswan
Copy link
Contributor

@cpswan cpswan commented Jul 30, 2024

fixes #4282

  • Moved setuptools>=65.5.1 from dev-requirements.txt to requirements.txt
  • Modified comment as not directly required is untrue
  • Added a line for setuptools to requirements.csv based on best guess for vendor entry looking at adjacent packages in PyPI

@terriko terriko changed the title build(deps): Move setuptools from dev-requirements.txt to requirements.txt build(deps): Move setuptools to requirements.txt (from dev reqs) Jul 30, 2024
terriko
terriko approved these changes Jul 30, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@terriko terriko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is actually an entry for setuptools in the db already, so I'll fix requirements.csv and shorten the commit message for gitlint and then this should be good to merge. Thank you!

@terriko terriko merged commit c442751 into intel:main Jul 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@terriko terriko terriko approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
awaiting CI
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

fix: install into a Python 3.12 venv fails due to setuptools being a runtime dependency not just a dev dependency
2 participants
@cpswan @terriko