Helllo there,
I am building a small Python package to a large extend because I want to learn about the packaging process itself and how to setup a proper CI/CD Pipeline. For the latter I use GitLab.
Here is my current problem that I could not fix to my satisfaction:
My project depends on numpy and matplotlib. I have added these in my setup.cfg under [options] as
install_requires =
numpy >=1.21, <2
matplotlib >= 3.5, <4
For my CI Pipeline I need a Docker container that also satisfies these requirements. Specifically I want to lint my source code with pylint that will complain about the imported packages not beeing installed otherwise. Of course many container images on dockerhub would fit for such a small and common set of requirements. But as I said earlier I want to implement a comparatively general approach and not rely on existing containers.
So I set up a Dockerfile. But I did not want to write down the dependencies explicitly again. At least not the ones that are already mentioned in setup.cfg. My current solution is ... ugly ... to say the least:
FROM python:3.8-alpine
RUN pip install --upgrade pip
RUN pip install pylint==2.12.2 pytest==6.2.1 flake8==4.0.1
RUN apk add g++ jpeg-dev zlib-dev libjpeg make
COPY setup.cfg .
RUN python -c "import setuptools; import subprocess; CONFIG = setuptools.config.read_configuration('setup.cfg'); PACKAGES = CONFIG['options']['install_requires']; subprocess.check_call(['pip', 'install', '-v', *PACKAGES]);"
COPY install_requires.py .
I could have put the python code that reads the setup.cfg in a separate script and also copy that into the container but I didn't want to overload my repo with this kind of stuff.
Ok ... finally the now obvious questions:
Do you think this is a proper solution?
What could I have done differently?
Ty all,
Franz
I am developing a python package managed by poetry. The package has some complex requirements that are very difficult to install successfully on my system. I want the ability to install this in editable mode, with the ability to ignore dependencies (something which the developer of poetry frowns on). Unfortunately, I do not have the option of converting this package to a more mature packaging system.
Apparently the simple solution is to create a setup.py for the project and pip install -e that. Since unfortunately poetry has spread like a cancer to many projects now, I will have to employ such a workaround frequently. As such, I want to minimize the tedium by not copying over fields like description which are irrelevant to the developing the package.
What is the minimal setup.py file that I can use as a template for such poetry projects? I assume it must at least include the package name, version and location. Is there anything else?
I am also planning to not put any requirements in the setup.py file, since the whole point is to bypass the requirements defined by poetry and pyproject.toml. I am fine with manually resolving ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'foo' errors by typing pip install foo.
It appears sufficient to create the following file:
from distutils.core import setup
setup(
name="<PACKAGE_NAME>",
version="<PACKAGE_VERSION>"
)
And also comment out the entire [build-system] block in the pyproject.toml file (see also How do I configure git to ignore some files locally? so you don't accidentally commit to that).
I think the package name and version can be automatically pulled from the toml file as well, but not sure right now how to do it.
When I use the command python setup.py test, all of the documentation I've seen says setuptools will handle installing the testing dependencies. Where does it install them and are they deleted from the machine after the test suite runs? I've noticed none of the testing modules are actually installed into my virtual environment after this command completes.
I understand it takes all of the modules in the tests_require list and installs them somewhere but I'm not sure where, what it does with them afterward and why it does this. Also, is there any way to pass arguments to the command without using flags, like with a config file or something?
Avoid python setup.py test and tests_require, it's crufty and is now deprecated.
That old feature just downloads the test deps to the project's setup directory, which is seldom what the developer wanted or expected to happen! That doesn't work well in a modern CI workflows with virtual environments, where you would want your dependencies installed to site-packages.
The recommended way to do it using setuptools these days is with an extras_require tag.. See here for an example.
It installs them into an automatically-created subdirectory of the code base named .eggs as .eggs. That's because .eggs are designed to be importable from any location.
This will thus most likely not work in a modern environment because packages are not distributed as .eggs (which lost competition to .whls) so setuptools will have to build them from source (with bdist_egg). Which is likely to fail for many widely-used binary packages with nontrivial build requirements (not to mention the time needed and the fact that packages are not tested as .eggs, either, and may fail when packaged like this).
Instead, listing build requirements in requirements.txt and invoking pip install -r requirements.txt before the build seems to have become widespread practice. This does not make setup.py automatically buildable from source by pip though.
I tried to install them myself from setup.py but this proved to be fragile (e.g. if the user doesn't have write access to site-packages).
The best solution adopted by at least a number of high-profile projects seems to be to just make setup.py fail if they are not present. This is especially useful if the requirements are not Python but C libraries as setup.py doesn't know how to install these in the specific environment anyway. As you can see, this complements requirements.txt naturally.
I started working with Python. I've added requirements.txt and setup.py to my project. But, I am still confused about the purpose of both files. I have read that setup.py is designed for redistributable things and that requirements.txt is designed for non-redistributable things. But I am not certain this is accurate.
How are those two files truly intended to be used?
requirements.txt:
This helps you to set up your development environment.
Programs like pip can be used to install all packages listed in the file in one fell swoop. After that you can start developing your python script. Especially useful if you plan to have others contribute to the development or use virtual environments.
This is how you use it:
pip install -r requirements.txt
It can be produced easily by pip itself:
pip freeze > requirements.txt
pip automatically tries to only add packages that are not installed by default, so the produced file is pretty minimal.
setup.py:
This helps you to create packages that you can redistribute.
The setup.py script is meant to install your package on the end user's system, not to prepare the development environment as pip install -r requirements.txt does. See this answer for more details on setup.py.
The dependencies of your project are listed in both files.
The short answer is that requirements.txt is for listing package requirements only. setup.py on the other hand is more like an installation script. If you don't plan on installing the python code, typically you would only need requirements.txt.
The file setup.py describes, in addition to the package dependencies, the set of files and modules that should be packaged (or compiled, in the case of native modules (i.e., written in C)), and metadata to add to the python package listings (e.g. package name, package version, package description, author, ...).
Because both files list dependencies, this can lead to a bit of duplication. Read below for details.
requirements.txt
This file lists python package requirements. It is a plain text file (optionally with comments) that lists the package dependencies of your python project (one per line). It does not describe the way in which your python package is installed. You would generally consume the requirements file with pip install -r requirements.txt.
The filename of the text file is arbitrary, but is often requirements.txt by convention. When exploring source code repositories of other python packages, you might stumble on other names, such as dev-dependencies.txt or dependencies-dev.txt. Those serve the same purpose as dependencies.txt but generally list additional dependencies of interest to developers of the particular package, namely for testing the source code (e.g. pytest, pylint, etc.) before release. Users of the package generally wouldn't need the entire set of developer dependencies to run the package.
If multiplerequirements-X.txt variants are present, then usually one will list runtime dependencies, and the other build-time, or test dependencies. Some projects also cascade their requirements file, i.e. when one requirements file includes another file (example). Doing so can reduce repetition.
setup.py
This is a python script which uses the setuptools module to define a python package (name, files included, package metadata, and installation). It will, like requirements.txt, also list runtime dependencies of the package. Setuptools is the de-facto way to build and install python packages, but it has its shortcomings, which over time have sprouted the development of new "meta-package managers", like pip. Example shortcomings of setuptools are its inability to install multiple versions of the same package, and lack of an uninstall command.
When a python user does pip install ./pkgdir_my_module (or pip install my-module), pip will run setup.py in the given directory (or module). Similarly, any module which has a setup.py can be pip-installed, e.g. by running pip install . from the same folder.
Do I really need both?
Short answer is no, but it's nice to have both. They achieve different purposes, but they can both be used to list your dependencies.
There is one trick you may consider to avoid duplicating your list of dependencies between requirements.txt and setup.py. If you have written a fully working setup.py for your package already, and your dependencies are mostly external, you could consider having a simple requirements.txt with only the following:
# requirements.txt
#
# installs dependencies from ./setup.py, and the package itself,
# in editable mode
-e .
# (the -e above is optional). you could also just install the package
# normally with just the line below (after uncommenting)
# .
The -e is a special pip install option which installs the given package in editable mode. When pip -r requirements.txt is run on this file, pip will install your dependencies via the list in ./setup.py. The editable option will place a symlink in your install directory (instead of an egg or archived copy). It allows developers to edit code in place from the repository without reinstalling.
You can also take advantage of what's called "setuptools extras" when you have both files in your package repository. You can define optional packages in setup.py under a custom category, and install those packages from just that category with pip:
# setup.py
from setuptools import setup
setup(
name="FOO"
...
extras_require = {
'dev': ['pylint'],
'build': ['requests']
}
...
)
and then, in the requirements file:
# install packages in the [build] category, from setup.py
# (path/to/mypkg is the directory where setup.py is)
-e path/to/mypkg[build]
This would keep all your dependency lists inside setup.py.
Note: You would normally execute pip and setup.py from a sandbox, such as those created with the program virtualenv. This will avoid installing python packages outside the context of your project's development environment.
For the sake of completeness, here is how I see it in 3 4 different angles.
Their design purposes are different
This is the precise description quoted from the official documentation (emphasis mine):
Whereas install_requires (in setup.py) defines the dependencies for a single project, Requirements Files are often used to define the requirements for a complete Python environment.
Whereas install_requires requirements are minimal, requirements files often contain an exhaustive listing of pinned versions for the purpose of achieving repeatable installations of a complete environment.
But it might still not easy to be understood, so in next section, there come 2 factual examples to demonstrate how the 2 approaches are supposed to be used, differently.
Their actual usages are therefore (supposed to be) different
If your project foo is going to be released as a standalone library (meaning, others would probably do import foo), then you (and your downstream users) would want to have a flexible declaration of dependency, so that your library would not (and it must not) be "picky" about what exact version of YOUR dependencies should be. So, typically, your setup.py would contain lines like this:
install_requires=[
'A>=1,<2',
'B>=2'
]
If you just want to somehow "document" or "pin" your EXACT current environment for your application bar, meaning, you or your users would like to use your application bar as-is, i.e. running python bar.py, you may want to freeze your environment so that it would always behave the same. In such case, your requirements file would look like this:
A==1.2.3
B==2.3.4
# It could even contain some dependencies NOT strickly required by your library
pylint==3.4.5
In reality, which one do I use?
If you are developing an application bar which will be used by python bar.py, even if that is "just script for fun", you are still recommended to use requirements.txt because, who knows, next week (which happens to be Christmas) you would receive a new computer as a gift, so you would need to setup your exact environment there again.
If you are developing a library foo which will be used by import foo, you have to prepare a setup.py. Period.
But you may still choose to also provide a requirements.txt at the same time, which can:
(a) either be in the A==1.2.3 style (as explained in #2 above);
(b) or just contain a magical single .
.
The latter is essentially using the conventional requirements.txt habit to document your installation step is pip install ., which means to "install the requirements based on setup.py" while without duplication. Personally I consider this last approach kind of blurs the line, adds to the confusion, but it is nonetheless a convenient way to explicitly opt out for dependency pinning when running in a CI environment. The trick was derived from an approach mentioned by Python packaging maintainer Donald in his blog post.
Different lower bounds.
Assuming there is an existing engine library with this history:
engine 1.1.0 Use steam
...
engine 1.2.0 Internal combustion is invented
engine 1.2.1 Fix engine leaking oil
engine 1.2.2 Fix engine overheat
engine 1.2.3 Fix occasional engine stalling
engine 2.0.0 Introducing nuclear reactor
You follow the above 3 criteria and correctly decided that your new library hybrid-engine would use a setup.py to declare its dependency engine>=1.2.0,<2, and then your separated application reliable-car would use requirements.txt to declare its dependency engine>=1.2.3,<2 (or you may want to just pin engine==1.2.3). As you see, your choice for their lower bound number are still subtly different, and neither of them uses the latest engine==2.0.0. And here is why.
hybrid-engine depends on engine>=1.2.0 because, the needed add_fuel() API was first introduced in engine 1.2.0, and that capability is the necessity of hybrid-engine, regardless of whether there might be some (minor) bugs inside such version and been fixed in subsequent versions 1.2.1, 1.2.2 and 1.2.3.
reliable-car depends on engine>=1.2.3 because that is the earliest version WITHOUT known issues, so far. Sure there are new capabilities in later versions, i.e. "nuclear reactor" introduced in engine 2.0.0, but they are not necessarily desirable for project reliable-car. (Your yet another new project time-machine would likely use engine>=2.0.0, but that is a different topic, though.)
TL;DR
requirements.txt lists concrete dependencies
setup.py lists abstract dependencies
A common misunderstanding with respect to dependency management in Python is whether you need to use a requirements.txt or setup.py file in order to handle dependencies.
The chances are you may have to use both in order to ensure that dependencies are handled appropriately in your Python project.
The requirements.txt file is supposed to list the concrete dependencies. In other words, it should list pinned dependencies (using the == specifier). This file will then be used in order to create a working virtual environment that will have all the dependencies installed, with the specified versions.
On the other hand, the setup.py file should list the abstract dependencies. This means that it should list the minimal dependencies for running the project. Apart from dependency management though, this file also serves the package distribution (say on PyPI).
For a more comprehensive read, you can read the article requirements.txt vs setup.py in Python on TDS.
Now going forward and as of PEP-517 and PEP-518, you may have to use a pyproject.toml in order to specify that you want to use setuptools as the build-tool and an additional setup.cfg file to specify the details.
For more details you can read the article setup.py vs setup.cfg in Python.
I'm using pip with virtualenv to package and install some Python libraries.
I'd imagine what I'm doing is a pretty common scenario. I'm the maintainer on several libraries for which I can specify the dependencies explicitly. A few of my libraries are dependent on third party libraries that have transitive dependencies over which I have no control.
What I'm trying to achieve is for a pip install on one of my libraries to download/install all of its upstream dependencies. What I'm struggling with in the pip documentation is if/how requirements files can do this on their own or if they're really just a supplement to using install_requires.
Would I use install_requires in all of my libraries to specify dependencies and version ranges and then only use a requirements file to resolve a conflict and/or freeze them for a production build?
Let's pretend I live in an imaginary world (I know, I know) and my upstream dependencies are straightforward and guaranteed to never conflict or break backward compatibility. Would I be compelled to use a pip requirements file at all or just let pip/setuptools/distribute install everything based on install_requires?
There are a lot of similar questions on here, but I couldn't find any that were as basic as when to use one or the other or using them both together harmoniously.
My philosophy is that install_requires should indicate a minimum of what you need. It might include version requirements if you know that some versions will not work; but it shouldn't have version requirements where you aren't sure (e.g., you aren't sure if a future release of a dependency will break your library or not).
Requirements files on the other hand should indicate what you know does work, and may include optional dependencies that you recommend. For example you might use SQLAlchemy but suggest MySQL, and so put MySQLdb in the requirements file).
So, in summary: install_requires is to keep people away from things that you know don't work, while requirements files to lead people towards things you know do work. One reason for this is that install_requires requirements are always checked, and cannot be disabled without actually changing the package metadata. So you can't easily try a new combination. Requirements files are only checked at install time.
here's what I put in my setup.py:
# this grabs the requirements from requirements.txt
REQUIREMENTS = [i.strip() for i in open("requirements.txt").readlines()]
setup(
.....
install_requires=REQUIREMENTS
)
The Python Packaging User Guide has a page about this topic, I highly recommend you read it:
install_requires vs Requirements files
Summary:
install_requires is there to list the dependencies of the package that absolutely must be installed for the package to work. It is not meant to pin the dependencies to specific versions, but ranges are accepted, for example install_requires=['django>=1.8']. install_requires is observed by pip install name-on-pypi and other tools.
requirements.txt is just a text file, that you can choose to run pip install -r requirements.txt against. It's meant to have versions of all dependencies and subdependencies pinned, like this: django==1.8.1. You can create one using pip freeze > requirements.txt. (Some services, like Heroku, automatically run pip install -r requirements.txt for you.) pip install name-on-pypi does not look at requirements.txt, only at install_requires.
I only ever use a setup.py and install_requires because there is only one place to look at. It is just as powerful as having a requirements file and there is no duplication to maintain.