Add support for setup.py
jayfk opened this issue · 5 comments
After calling ./setup.py egg_info -e «tmpdir», requires.txt can be fed into a pip requirements parser (though there might be subtle differences).
@jhermann the main issue there is that you are executing a setup.py to get there which is fraught with so many perils (not the proper system reqs, python version, etc, etc). See aboutcode-org/scancode-toolkit#253 (comment) for some pointers and approaches the main serious ones being either: AST parsing or mock execution
@jayfk do you plan to include in this ticket pbr setup.cfg which is popular on openstack and setup.cfg in general too?
FWIW, this is an example of setup.py that is hard to make sense: https://github.com/jakubroztocil/httpie/blob/f1d4861faed6486a356175ce9f92d4da96ddba01/setup.py
- an AST approach will have a harder time to get the test and install requirements, defined as variables
- a mock or AST will have a hard time to get some deps that are Python version- and OS-specific
- even a full live execution would be subject to the problem in 2.
I am not sure the complexity is worth handling in such a case, at least for a start.
@jayfk do you plan to include in this ticket pbr setup.cfg which is popular on openstack and setup.cfg in general too?
This basically looks like a tox.ini: https://github.com/openstack-dev/pbr/blob/master/setup.cfg. Shouldn't be a problem to include it.
an AST approach will have a harder time to get the test and install requirements, defined as variables
a mock or AST will have a hard time to get some deps that are Python version- and OS-specific
even a full live execution would be subject to the problem in 2.
On setup.py files that come with a wheel we might be able to extract metadata from it. I know that some people are working on this but for the time being using an AST approach is probably the sanest thing we could to.