-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
editable_mode=compat alternative #19983
Conversation
Current dependencies on/for this PR:
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. |
@@ -1 +1,4 @@ | |||
uncommitted/ | |||
uncommitted/ | |||
uncommitted/ |
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.
?
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.
some test in dagster ge does this modification it seems
def ensure_dagster_aws_tests_import() -> None: | ||
dagster_package_root = (Path(dagster_aws_init_py) / ".." / "..").resolve() | ||
assert ( | ||
dagster_package_root / "dagster_aws_tests" | ||
).exists(), "Could not find dagster_aws_tests where expected" | ||
sys.path.append(dagster_package_root.as_posix()) |
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.
if you forget to add this when adding a new _tests import, what's the experience you get today on BK? It would be sad if it works great until it tries to run on 3.12 in the release branch, then gets a confusing error
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.
the uv installs for the default 3.11 fail without this stuff so you should hit it on PR runs
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.
Is all the deleted docs_snippets stuff a rebase issue?
I leave it to you whether to merge-- uv is doing about a release a day and I know Charlie is prioritizing this so I wouldn't be surprised if we get editable_mode=compat support in the next 24 hours. But maybe we won't-- either way I think if we do land this just to get things running we should revert to editable_mode=compat when uv support lands.
to me the benefit of getting away from needing
https://setuptools.pypa.io/en/latest/userguide/development_mode.html#legacy-behavior |
7c13ce0
to
b852c0c
Compare
Deploy preview for dagit-core-storybook ready! ✅ Preview Built with commit f9b4032. |
80d9675
to
f9b4032
Compare
Deploy preview for dagit-storybook ready! ✅ Preview Built with commit f9b4032. |
f9b4032
to
0f753bf
Compare
0f753bf
to
49bec11
Compare
Manually muck with the path for our goofy imports instead of relying on `--config-settings editable_mode=compat` The motivation for this was to enable `uv` in `tox`, but the `uv` level support is coming soon astral-sh/uv#1460 so we may decide to dismiss this and just stick with compat mode installs ## How I Tested These Changes bk
Manually muck with the path for our goofy imports instead of relying on
--config-settings editable_mode=compat
The motivation for this was to enable
uv
intox
, but theuv
level support is coming soon astral-sh/uv#1460so we may decide to dismiss this and just stick with compat mode installs
How I Tested These Changes
bk