| From: | Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Federico Campoli <rotellaro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | psycopg(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Psycopg 2.7.4 released |
| Date: | 2018-02-08 19:16:58 |
| Message-ID: | CA+mi_8YBNcgbguijY=0_RCVQeDi-2Mav8oVL_Yk6uUeDWEVtrw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | psycopg |
Sorry, wrong send earlier...
On 8 Feb 2018 7:04 p.m., "Federico" <rotellaro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
I was just wondering how can I manage this separation in the setup.py
(install_requires argument).
Currently I list psycopg2>=2.7.3.
Shall I follow the pattern and create two different source packages or do
you recommend a different approach?
If binary packages work as expected you may just use that as a dependency,
so "psycopg2-binary>=2.7.3" should do.
But now it occurs to me that the choice of not releasing a source package
under psycopg2-binary was probably wrong: if you update your requirements
as above, installation would fail if the user has an old pip version, or a
non glibc architecture (e.g. Linux Alpine).
I'll create the missing package tomorrow morning. Once done, if your app is
not a multithread program also using the system ssh, depending on binary is
enough, I don't see reason for two packages.
Cheers
-- Daniele
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Federico | 2018-02-08 19:39:37 | Re: Psycopg 2.7.4 released |
| Previous Message | Daniele Varrazzo | 2018-02-08 19:07:33 | Re: Psycopg 2.7.4 released |