-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 294
feat: support uv-managed projects #850
Conversation
| }); | ||
| t.true( | ||
| stderr.includes( | ||
| stdout.includes( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Something weird is going on here that, despite being thrown as throw new serverless.classes.Error it is being output on stdout instead of stderr. I'm uncertain of the cause, but I don't think it's related to this plugin.
|
Would love to have this! |
|
I'm looking forward to this feature. UV support would be a great addition to the plugin. I appreciate the work on this! |
|
@czubocha as the last one to publish a release, any idea who's looking into PRs, this would be quite valuable! |
|
+1 Would be great to see this merged. Our build system is currently split between multiple packaging tools because we can't use uv with serverless. |
|
+1 |
|
I also would like for this PR to get traction, thank you for opening! +1 |
|
+1 |
|
Good news - the serverless-python-requirements plugin is now integrated into Serverless Framework v4.22.0! 🎉 It’s fully backward compatible, covered under the same SLA and maintenance policy as the Framework itself. Because of this integration, the standalone 📘 Check out the official docs for more details. From now on, please report all issues and feature requests related to this integration in the Serverless Framework repository. Thanks everyone for your patience, feedback, and contributions! 💪 |
Resolves #849
Adds support for uv managed projects, following the project's existing pattern of exporting a requirements file using the relevant project tool.
This does buck one-convention in this repo, in that it requires the user to have generated their own lock file, which is generally a best-practice when using one of these project management tools, and inspects for the existence of the
uv.lockfile as part of its check as to whether or not uv can be utilized with this plugin. This could be an issue for teams that are not otherwise committing their lock files to their repos and have automated deployments of their application in a CI/CD pipeline, although there exists trivial solutions to overcome that barrier.Note: there is another issue, #830, which also asks for uv support in replacing pip, which this PR does not intend to include.