packaging
Closed this issue · 1 comments
msftcangoblowm commented
There are two scripts, but no packaging. Each script should be a (testable) entrypoint.
Here is an example published package, with packaging design that works
You are welcome to borrow the packaging. Especially the semantic versioning.
msftcangoblowm commented
With packaging there would be no need to list the dependencies
The dependencies should be within requirements/.in files. Which are then expanded into requirements/.pip files
Using the command make upgrade
A pyproject.toml file would then have a section looking similar to (meaning steal this):
[tool.setuptools.dynamic]
optional-dependencies.pip = { file = ["requirements/pip.pip"] }
optional-dependencies.pip_tools = { file = ["requirements/pip-tools.pip"] }
dependencies = { file = ["requirements/prod.pip"] }
optional-dependencies.dev = { file = ["requirements/dev.pip"] }
optional-dependencies.manage = { file = ["requirements/manage.pip"] }
optional-dependencies.docs = { file = ["docs/requirements.pip"] }
version = {attr = "logging_strict._version.__version__"}
Afterwards can remove the dependencies list from README.[rst|md]