-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.7k
Switch packaging from setup.py
to pyproject.toml
#4129
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
Comments
Some comments from my side: Packages sizes for v21.1.1 are
So ptb is <1.5 times as large as ptb-raw while still behing well below 0.5MB in source / 1MB in whl. IMO footprint size concernes should not be too big. I'm in favor of deprecating ptb-raw. Even with installing ptb, you can still use the
With abandoning ptb-raw, we can then easily move to a pyproject.toml build setup, which is more modern and may offer some additional flexibility. related: #4282 |
What kind of feature are you missing? Where do you notice a shortcoming of PTB?
PTB currently builds the wheels for uploading to PyPI by running the command
python setup.py sdist bdist_wheel
(from the wiki). However, the use of that command is deprecated.The reason we are still using
setup.py
is because we wanted to dynamically build the wheels for both PTB and PTB-raw, and not have two separate repositories or files for that purpose. However, upon some observation, PTB has now made all its dependencies excepthttpx
optional. This negates the need for having PTB-raw in the first place.Additionally, the number of downloads for PTB-raw is tiny (12k/mo vs 1M/mo).
Describe the solution you'd like
Follow the packaging guide to migrate, and make sure that our build system follows the recommended guidelines. And then remove the
PTB-raw
package.Describe alternatives you've considered
We could still keep
setup.py
, but we have to stop using that setup.py command to build wheels.Additional context
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: