high-yak-8589909/28/2022, 5:27 PM
happy-kitchen-8948209/28/2022, 5:28 PM
high-yak-8589909/28/2022, 5:31 PM
, then changed my requirements file to
but I'm not getting any notice about my lockfile needing an update.
in the lockfile metadata
happy-kitchen-8948209/28/2022, 5:33 PM
high-yak-8589909/28/2022, 5:34 PM
in case that's relevant.
on something else and did not see different behavior just to make sure.
, I still don't see any invalidation happen (double checked I didn't change
hundreds-father-40409/28/2022, 5:50 PM
Is it possible that the lockfile validation is only working with the subset of the lockfile/requirements needed for the goals I am running?Ahhhh, yeah that is it!
high-yak-8589909/28/2022, 5:51 PM
happy-kitchen-8948209/28/2022, 5:53 PM
hundreds-father-40409/28/2022, 5:55 PM
to discover what goes into the lockfile. But honestly, that concern may be overblown: we already use
for dep inference
high-yak-8589909/28/2022, 5:55 PM
has installation issues so we add an additional requirement of
. Running my test that uses
does not trigger an invalid lockfile error
hundreds-father-40409/28/2022, 5:56 PM
high-yak-8589909/28/2022, 5:57 PM
hundreds-father-40409/28/2022, 5:57 PM
, but that gets cached. and they're agnostic to Pants the whole time
high-yak-8589909/28/2022, 6:01 PM
exactly match the metadata of my
happy-kitchen-8948209/28/2022, 7:00 PM
high-yak-8589909/28/2022, 7:03 PM
. There's no searching through all targets to find places where other
targets have been called out. So I can ask my system the simple question like "does the metadata in the lockfile exactly match requirements.txt"
happy-kitchen-8948209/28/2022, 10:11 PM