You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is both a feature request and a bug report, but the two are so directly related that I figured they should be included together.
Note that although the xontrib avox is mentioned here, the underlying features are provided by autovox of Xonsh proper.
Bug
When in a subdir within a recognized avox dir that triggers a virtual environment, typing avox create replies with "Working directory already has a virtual environment" -- but then proceeds to exit that virtual environment. When using cd to navigate out of the dir that has the virtualenv associated, it causes a traceback:
This is both a feature request and a bug report, but the two are so directly related that I figured they should be included together.
Note that although the xontrib
avox
is mentioned here, the underlying features are provided byautovox
of Xonsh proper.Bug
When in a subdir within a recognized
avox
dir that triggers a virtual environment, typingavox create
replies with "Working directory already has a virtual environment" -- but then proceeds to exit that virtual environment. When usingcd
to navigate out of the dir that has the virtualenv associated, it causes a traceback:Example:
Feature Request
It would be very nice to be able to have nested venvs.
The use case is repositories that have a venv that is typically used, but have subprojects that use a different venv.
Although I think they should be truly nested, that's not an important feature, and it's not what
vox
does. So, the desired behavior would be:Alternatively, "true" nesting would activate each virtualenv successively, but I don't know if venv supports that.
In any case, thanks for your this feature in general, it has been very useful.
xonfig
Expected Behavior
Current Behavior
Traceback (if applicable)
Steps to Reproduce
For community
⬇️ Please click the 👍 reaction instead of leaving a
+1
or 👍 commentThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: