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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove MANIFEST.in in favour of setup.cfg package data #550

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Remove MANIFEST.in in favour of setup.cfg package data #550

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

FollowTheProcess
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR removes MANIFEST.in in favour of specifying required package data in setup.cfg

I've validated that the produced tarballs are equivalent by running pyproject-build then extracting the resulting tarball to verify it's contents:

Before (with MANIFEST.in)

before

After (with setup.cfg package_data)

after

The only entries in MANIFEST.in were py.typed and anything with a .jinja2 extension which you can see in the images are still present 馃檪

Copy link
Collaborator

@DiddiLeija DiddiLeija left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sounds fine to me!

@henryiii
Copy link
Collaborator

Keep in mind, this will make the .jinga2's available in the wheel, while before it was only in the SDist. Not saying that's wrong or right, that's just a change. (py.typed obviously should be in the wheels)

@FollowTheProcess
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Keep in mind, this will make the .jinga2's available in the wheel, while before it was only in the SDist. Not saying that's wrong or right, that's just a change. (py.typed obviously should be in the wheels)

Ahh okay, didn't know that! Are there any unwanted consequences of this that you know of?

@henryiii
Copy link
Collaborator

Looking at it, it seems like it needs to be there to work - hmm, include_package_data is True, so this might have already been there. If that's the case, there's certainly no harm. It might be a good idea to add a check-manifest check? Unless you plan to move to Flit or something soon.

@henryiii
Copy link
Collaborator

It's usually a nice idea to include the tests folder in the SDist, but not the wheel. Currently it's not in the SDist.

@henryiii henryiii mentioned this pull request Dec 28, 2021
@FollowTheProcess
Copy link
Collaborator Author

FollowTheProcess commented Dec 28, 2021

It's usually a nice idea to include the tests folder in the SDist, but not the wheel. Currently it's not in the SDist.

I personally see no real problem in including the tests in the SDist 馃憤馃徎 would this require the MANIFEST.in?

@henryiii
Copy link
Collaborator

henryiii commented Dec 29, 2021

Yes, it would (otherwise you'd end up adding it to the wheel, at least any way I can think of).

@FollowTheProcess
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Okay cool, it would be good to get some more input on including tests in the SDist and if we go that way I'll close this off and we can do that instead 馃憤馃徎

@FollowTheProcess
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closing in favour of #552 and adding tests to the SDist (which requires MANIFEST.in)

@FollowTheProcess FollowTheProcess deleted the remove-manifest branch December 29, 2021 17:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants