-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
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
Poetry & PEP440 Disagree on an example in the PEP. #7050
Comments
Currently A possible approach for a fix would be to instead recognise this as |
Please be aware that this is probably not sufficient and will result in other issues. cf python-poetry/poetry-core#402 (review) IMO we have to change our "implicitly allow pre-releases" logic because our "allow pre-releases" is more like "do not prefer stable releases". |
probably "allow-prereleases" on individual dependencies was a mistake.
The default behaviour at https://peps.python.org/pep-0440/#handling-of-pre-releases requires no special flag and should be quite satisfactory. Poetry currently fails to satisfy the "tools ... SHOULD" section which is about explicitly allowing or disallowing pre-releases for all distributions (eg including transitive dependencies) Poetry is doing a half-assed job of the "tools ... MAY" section about doing the same on a per-distribution basis. (Because this is not configurable for transitive dependencies.) Obvs removing this flag would require some consensus and deprecation period, but simplification is a noble goal... |
This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
-vvv
option) and have included the output below.Issue
Discovered during the conversation in #7047.
Poetry does not return the same results as one of the examples in PEP 440.
prints
allowed=False
which does not match the example herecc: @dimbleby
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: