You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Consider a project with multiple sub-packages that depend on each other through their cmake find_package. We want that during the build step with isolation the appropriate dependency is used:
when built from sdist: use the PyPI index
when built from local git checkout: use relative path pointer
when built from git url/archive: same as local checkout (if possible)
Borrowing hatch's {root:uri} the effective pyproject.toml would look like
Afaiu this is not possible because the pip/uv fronted would have to recognise that pattern and it would not be acceptable on PyPI.
But we have dynamically inserted build-system.requires, so wouldn't it be possible to expose that on a tool.scikit-build field and expand it with or without the @ qualifier?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Do you have a link to the hatchling feature? We ultimately have to report a valid package specifier that is passed to pip/uv/etc, but I believe with overrides (we already have if.from-sdist) all we'd need is a config option for a package to add to the dynamic requirement list.
Basically they resolve the paths to file: before handing over to the frontends. And I see that they only support file:, so if we focus only that form also, it should be easy to implement that translation as well.
Consider a project with multiple sub-packages that depend on each other through their cmake
find_package
. We want that during the build step with isolation the appropriate dependency is used:sdist
: use the PyPI indexBorrowing hatch's
{root:uri}
the effectivepyproject.toml
would look likeAfaiu this is not possible because the
pip
/uv
fronted would have to recognise that pattern and it would not be acceptable on PyPI.But we have dynamically inserted
build-system.requires
, so wouldn't it be possible to expose that on atool.scikit-build
field and expand it with or without the@
qualifier?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: