Part of https://github.com/certbot/certbot/issues/10403.
As far as I can tell, "stick it in setup.py" is the official way of
handling complex dependencies. But since the version is static, we have
a little more choice here than we had with `certbot/pyproject.toml`.
We could put the version in the respective `pyproject.toml`s and read it
directly from the toml file with something like
[this](https://stackoverflow.com/a/78082561). Or otherwise load and
parse that file. The benefit of doing it that way is that all
non-certbot versions would be canonically in the `pyproject.toml`, and
also if we wanted we could use that same toml parsing to change the
version at release time instead of `sed`. I actually suspect `acme`,
`certbot-ci`, and `certbot-compatibility-test` will be the only ones
where we can completely delete `setup.py`, as the others all have
lockstep dependencies. (side note - we just never update `certbot-ci`
version. it's still set at `0.32.0.dev0`. there's no way this matters
but just noting.) I chose to do it this way instead because it seems
cleaner since we have to keep `setup.py` around anyway, but I don't have
a strong preference.
Based on what I've read, there's not actually a clean way to grab and
insert the version number within the toml file. This is due to [design
decisions](https://github.com/toml-lang/toml/issues/77) by the toml
authors. The clean `all` extras specification that we used in
`certbot/pyproject.toml` [seems to be an
outlier](https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/discussions/3627#discussioncomment-6476654)
because it's pip handling the self-reference, not toml.
This is not necessarily the absolute minimum versions/pins we could use,
but it does get tests working. Fixes
https://github.com/certbot/certbot/issues/10418.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brad Warren <bmw@users.noreply.github.com>
something weird happened to the changelog in
https://github.com/certbot/certbot/pull/10319. a 4.2.0 entry was added
below the entry for `5.0.0 - main` despite 4.2.0 not having been
released. since it's sounding like we're expecting our next release to
be 4.2.0 and not 5.0, i merged these two changelog entries into one for
4.2.0
i also modified our setup.py files to use 4.2.0.dev0 instead of
5.0.0.dev0 altho this isn't strictly necessary because our release
script will automatically set all version numbers to whatever version we
give it on the command line before building the release
Fixes#10252.
See further discussion here: https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/11457
We are doing option:
> Alternatively, enable the --use-pep517 pip option, possibly with
--no-build-isolation. The --use-pip517 flag will force pip to use the
modern mechanism for editable installs. --no-build-isolation may be
needed if your project has build-time requirements beyond setuptools and
wheel. By passing this flag, you are responsible for making sure your
environment already has the required dependencies to build your package.
Once the legacy mechanism is removed, --use-pep517 will have no effect
and will essentially be enabled by default in this context.
Major changes made here include:
- Add `--use-pep517` to use the modern mechanism, which will be the only
mechanism in future pip releases
- Change to `/src` layout to appease mypy, and because for editable
installs that really is the normal way these days.
- `cd acme && mkdir src && mv acme src/` etc.
- add `where='src'` argument to `find_packages` and add
`package_dir={'': 'src'},` in `setup.py`s
- update `MANIFEST.in` files with new path locations
- Update our many hardcoded filepaths
- Update `importlib-metadata` requirement to fix
double-plugin-entry-point problem in oldest tests
fixes#10105
this PR updates our minimally required cryptography and pyopenssl
versions as well as updating our policy for choosing minimum dependency
versions generally
before this PR, we were trying to keep compatibility with packages
available in EPEL 9 using the python 3 version available in RHEL 9.
after the discussion in #10105 we decided not to do this anymore
because:
* EPEL 9 may not want to update to certbot 3.0+ anyway because of our
backwards incompatible changes from certbot 2.x
* RHEL 9 appstream repos now contain newer versions of many of our
dependencies for newer versions of python
* alternate installation methods for RHEL 9 based users including our
snaps and pip are available
on a call we then discussed what distro repositories we should track
instead of EPEL 9. our docs previously said Debian sid/unstable, but we
felt this as unnecessary because Debian sid can and does change very
quickly. if we wanted a new dependency there, Debian could probably
accommodate it
we also considered RHEL 10 + EPEL 10, however, these repos are not even
stable yet and certbot and many of its dependencies are not yet packaged
there at all
for these reasons, plus many of the reasons we decided to upgrade past
EPEL 9 with the default python 3 version there, we decided that at least
for now, we will remove any linux distro considerations when choosing
minimal dependency versions of certbot
as i wrote in the contributing docs, we may choose to reconsider this
plan if there are requests for us to do so, but based on the information
above, we are not sure this will ever even happen and removing this
constraint significantly simplifies development of certbot
Because of the change from using setuptools.pkg_resources to using
importlib, we no longer need a runtime dependency on setuptools. It is
still required, however, for running setup.py.
