4 ms·
They can't support reading the poetry data because it's not generic. Nor are most practical implementations of tools using pyproject.toml because they all use c
by sametmax 7y ago
They can't support reading the poetry data because it's not generic. Nor are most practical implementations of tools using pyproject.toml because they all use custom tool-namespaced fields in pyproject.toml: it's far from a standardized format yet, despite the push for using it from the people that made it.
I still wish poetry would support setup.cfg in parallel. It has been working for 2 years, is compatible with pip, setuptools and the whole legacy stack, and most fields are standards and documented.
- j88439h84 7y agoI should be more specific about what I meant. I would like to see tox support `install_commands` (https://github.com/tox-dev/tox/issues/715 https://github.com/tox-dev/tox/issues/715) I would like to see pex support the `build-system` feature. (https://github.com/pantsbuild/pex/issues/660 https://github.com/pantsbuild/pex/issues/660) For pip, I'm not sure what's involved in getting everything to work generically. This is probably not simple. It has the consequence that when we don't have control over the install command, we end up needing hacks like using `extras` for ReadTheDocs (e.g. https://github.com/readthedocs/readthedocs.org/issues/4912#issuecomment-483756581 https://github.com/readthedocs/readthedocs.org/issues/4912#i...)