hundreds-father-40410/01/2020, 5:24 PM
goal. One other disruptive change we want to do before landing 2.0: rename
. We should stop privileging the status quo.
2. More accurately model that Pants is an orchestrator for the tools you already use; we’re not inventing some binary format, which might be implied with the status quo.
We know it’s disruptive. We’ll use a deprecation cycle + give a script or sed regex snippet to automatically fix this.
Any thoughts on this?
witty-crayon-2278610/01/2020, 5:27 PM
wooden-thailand-838610/01/2020, 5:28 PM
hundreds-father-40410/01/2020, 5:31 PM
make sense regardless of the mode you’re using. If it’s roughly the same, then we could use the same target.
should not yet be changed, then. Until we have better scoped other test runners like Hypothesis
I think we would still want to change
though. It has lots of very custom fields like
, which is specific to the Pex API. It’s likely that
has its own custom set of fields like that, specific to the Pyinstaller API. That is, it’s unlikely we’d want to use one target for multiple different types of binaries
wooden-thailand-838610/01/2020, 5:32 PM
hundreds-father-40410/01/2020, 5:33 PM
are both very generic, they’re probably good names already
is much more generic than it really should be. It’s not any Python binary, it’s specifically metadata to convert your code into a Pex
witty-crayon-2278610/01/2020, 5:34 PM
either, for example, so it won’t collide
average-vr-5679510/01/2020, 10:20 PM
, don't have super strong feelings about pytest either way - I can certainly see that there's a lot more overlap in semantics and fields between test runners. On the other hand, in v1 we had
not java or JVM...
hundreds-father-40410/01/2020, 10:21 PM
, I still think
is a good name. It makes things more declarative.
But I generally try to avoid premature changes etc
average-vr-5679510/01/2020, 10:23 PM
witty-crayon-2278610/01/2020, 10:25 PM
average-vr-5679510/01/2020, 10:27 PM
wrap an abstract
so you can conceptually
the thing, but to get a deployable you need to think about packaging formats
witty-crayon-2278610/01/2020, 10:28 PM
hundreds-father-40410/01/2020, 10:28 PM
naming it “pex binary” does mean that you have to explain pex earlier than you would otherwiseI think this could be a good thing. I suspect we’ve been abstracting over Pex a little too much. At the end of the day, we are wrapping Pex. You are going to need to know what the project is and some of its basics. Being explicit about it might be more clear.
average-vr-5679510/01/2020, 10:28 PM
wrappers on the `build`/`package` PR
witty-crayon-2278610/02/2020, 12:08 AM
won’t create a pex
./pants run $pex_binary
hundreds-father-40410/02/2020, 12:11 AM
, I’m not sure they would expect
./pants package $pex_binary
to duplicate that.
I’m not seeing a big difference between
./pants run $python_binary
./pants run $pex_binary
witty-crayon-2278610/02/2020, 12:36 AM