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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

setting “python_requires” with ">=3.6.2" is a better way to declare Python compatibility #379

Closed
PyVCEchecker opened this issue Oct 28, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@PyVCEchecker
Copy link

Hello!
I noticed such a declaration in setup.py

classifiers=[
        "Programming Language :: Python :: 3.6",
        "Programming Language :: Python :: 3.7",
        "Programming Language :: Python :: 3.8",
        "Programming Language :: Python :: 3.9",
   ...
   ]

and the dependency "pylint-plugin-utils>=0.7" has a declaration "requires_python": ">=3.6.2",
so I guess you want to set python>3.6.2. And I think it is a better way to declare Python compatibility by using the keyword argument python_requires than argument classifiers for some reasons:

  • Descriptions in python_requires will be reflected in the metadata
  • “pip install” can check such metadata on the fly during distribution selection , and prevent from downloading and installing the incompatible package versions.
  • If the user does not specify any version constraint, pip can automatically choose the latest compatible package version for users.

Way to improve:
modify setup() in setup.py, add python_requires keyword argument:

setup(…
     python_requires=">=3.6.2",
     …)

Thanks for your attention.
Best regrads,
PyVCEchecker

@Pierre-Sassoulas
Copy link
Member

Nice catch, feel free to open a pull request to get the credit 😄

@carlio
Copy link
Member

carlio commented May 15, 2023

I'll close this as I have closed the corresponding PR #380 as this has been solved with the move to poetry

@carlio carlio closed this as completed May 15, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants