@ImreC thanks for contributing again.
I would appreciate if it, if you could include a test case and the usual news fragment.

Yeah sure. Was just checking if this was literally it. Will do that later today

Yeah that seems like the logical change. @ImreC Not sure you timeline, but I'd like to do another pipenv release due to another issue in the next week or so and would love if we could include this one as well.

Hi @matteius, this completely fell off the map on my end. I'm having a very busy couple of weeks. I will find some time on Friday to do this

@oz123 @matteius I have now implemented it as an optional flag. Do you agree with this approach? Happy to make it default if that's better

@ImreC I am thinking it should be the default behavior to include markers, but perhaps a flag like you have to exclude them (non-default) makes sense? Especially with reports like this, having the ability to exclude markers may be relevant for some:

Also, Not sure if you saw my comment the other day I CC'd you on another issue report, the TLDR is (having trouble finding the ticket link)

I do wonder if in the code I linked to for the requirements command, if we should have the logic first add the dev dependencies so that the production dependencies can overwrite any of those? -- that seems more correct to me than allowing the dev dependencies to break the production specifiers.

I tend to agree here, the flag should actually be --exclude-markers and the default behaviour should include them.

@oz123 @matteius I flipped the markers flag. I really have been short for time the last couple of weeks. Hope this covers all.

@ImreC @matteius please also fix the merge conflict.

@oz123 I am not seeing what you mean by a potential merge conflict ... If there is not one, I am ready to merge this and will push a commit to main to fix the documentation typo.

Ay! Sorry depending on the type of merge, there will be a conflict or there won't be.