setup build and deploy action #18
Conversation
chrisantonellis
commented
Feb 17, 2021
•
chrisantonellis
commented
- setup build and deploy action
- fixed imports in init.py and set release version
- fixed classifiers in setup.cfg
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #18 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 7 7
Lines 189 189
Branches 16 16
=========================================
Hits 189 189 |
| echo "Ensuring pip is up to date" | ||
| python -m pip install --upgrade pip | ||
| echo "Installing the latest version of pypa/build" | ||
| pip install build |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Curious why the pip upgrade is triggered with python -m and this uses pip straight. Why is that? ❓
There was a problem hiding this comment.
initially implemented by @plannigan so I am unsure!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was actually implemented by @jamescurtin, but it should be the same either way. I don't have an opinion on which should be used going forward.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Correct: both are the same, I was just inconsistent in usage. (Reference).
python -m pip has the benefit of being explicit about which version of the python binary is used on a system that uses multiple (i.e. python vs. python3), but for our purposes either is fine.
| inputs: | ||
| package-import-name: | ||
| description: "Name used to import the package from python code" | ||
| required: true | ||
| packages-dir: | ||
| description: The target directory for distribution |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider wrapping the value in ""~ (and other strings in this file- helps keep things consistent and provides some measure of safety. 😁 )
| @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ | |||
| name: Publish Release | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Likewise, consider wrapping all strings in this file in "". 🎞️
| @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ | |||
| name: Publish Release | |||
| env: | |||
| PYTHON_VERSION: "3.9" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this mean the env that this workflow runs in going to be using Python 3.9? I'm curious if we should be running it in Python 3.8 since we don't add a 3.9 Classifier listing in setup.cfg
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah I should bump this down cause its just weird, but as we're publishing a pure-python wheel it shouldn't be an issue which version of python builds it
| Programming Language :: Python :: 3 | ||
| Programming Language :: Python :: 3.6 | ||
| Programming Language :: Python :: 3.7 | ||
| Programming Language :: Python :: 3.8 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we also add a Programming Language :: Python :: 3.9 classifier (if we intend to publish for 3.9) and a License :: OSI Approved :: MIT License classifier like in Columbo?
