[BangPypers] Do you pin your requirements.txt ?

[Saager Mhatre]

On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Dhananjay Nene <dhananjay.nene at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Saager Mhatre <saager.mhatre at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Sep 16, 2013 8:46 AM, "Dhananjay Nene" <dhananjay.nene at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> let me state that while I pin requirements.txt
> >
> > To be just a little pedantic here- you pin version of dependencies, not
> the
> > entire requirements.txt.
>
> Matching the pedantic spirit => Look at the topic of the thread. It
> could've just ended with a No.
>
> If you read other content here, I've talked about [...]
>

Dhananjay, I was being pedantic in general. That wasn't directed
specifically at anyone in particular.

> Just saying... 'cause, even though I may have
> > myself used the phrase in previous responses on this thread, I personally
> > prefer to specify dependencies in setup.py and avoid creating a separate
> > requirements.txt file.
>
> Fair enough. A alternative valid on its own merit.
>
> > Either approach could very well be put down as a
> > stylistic difference,
>
> No. A stylistic difference implies no non-aesthetic differences.


Now that I reread that, I meant stylistic 'preference' not 'difference'.
Either way, I was referring to my stylistic preference of specifying
dependencies in setup.py over specifying them in requirements.txt. It is
possible to pin direct as well as transitive dependencies in both
approaches; which is what makes them only stylistically different.

> but the specific compatibility of these approaches
> > with different build tools (distutils, setuptools/easy_install,
> > distribute/pip) makes it significant, IMHO.
> >
>
> That is something I would be keen to understand. (Should be a separate
> thread imo).


Some other time... I don't feel like raging any more this month. Just
finished my quota while mentoring the teams at in50Hrs this weekend.

- d