In a requirements-*.in
file, at the top of the file, are lines with -c
and -r
flags followed by a requirements-*.in
file. Uses relative paths (ignoring URLs).
Say have docs/requirements-pip-tools.in
-r ../requirements/requirements-prod.in
-c ../requirements/requirements-pins-base.in
-c ../requirements/requirements-pins-cffi.in
...
The intent is compiling this would produce docs/requirements-pip-tool.txt
But there is confusion as to which flag to use. It's non-obvious.
constraint
Subset of requirements features. Intended to restrict package versions. Does not necessarily (might not) install the package!
Does not support:
Personal preference
-
always organize requirements files in folder(s)
-
don't prefix requirements files with requirements-
, just doing it here
-
DRY principle applies; split out constraints which are shared.
But pyproject.toml supports neither locking nor constraints.
Ah true, I had the wrong idea about this constraints file. What's your use case?
That's a loaded question. Would like to avoid answering atm. Would lead to a package release announcement which this post is not; not prepared to right right now.
Instead here is an admittedly unsatisfactory response which i apologize for.
Wish to have the option to, later, take it back and give the straight exact answer which your question deserves.
my use case is your use case and everyone else's use case.
Avoiding dependency hell while keeping things easily manageable. Breaking up complexity into smallest pieces possible. And having a CLI tool to fix what's fixable while reporting on what's not.
My preference is to do this beforehand.
My only use case so far has been fixing broken builds when a package has build-)ldependencies that don't actually work (e.g. a dependency of a dependency breaks stuff). Not super common, but it happens.
Woah! Was giving the benefit of the doubt. You blow my mind.
The locking is very very specific to apps and dev environment.
But lacking constraints is like cutting off an arm.