-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
conda-smithy 3.23.0 #246
conda-smithy 3.23.0 #246
Changes from all commits
50dc30e
654f9ab
02fca5a
db01232
7bf3a78
940c0ad
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@ | ||
{% set version = "3.22.1" %} | ||
{% set version = "3.23.0" %} | ||
|
||
package: | ||
name: conda-smithy | ||
version: {{ version }} | ||
|
||
source: | ||
url: https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-smithy/releases/download/v{{ version }}/conda-smithy-{{ version }}.tar.gz | ||
sha256: 7d8c766ced494aada59f56b2693411c212826c685b762b467d2070120d66c275 | ||
sha256: 6808967b9dc81bb42200441a7dc60e13492095db64ca53d4e21ce72119bb58a8 | ||
|
||
build: | ||
number: 0 | ||
|
@@ -23,6 +23,9 @@ requirements: | |
host: | ||
- python >=3.6 | ||
- pip | ||
- setuptools >=45 | ||
- setuptools-scm >=7 | ||
- tomli >=1.0.0 | ||
run: | ||
- python >=3.6 | ||
- setuptools | ||
|
@@ -42,6 +45,10 @@ requirements: | |
- scrypt | ||
- license-expression | ||
- libarchive | ||
run_constrained: | ||
# For more details about `shellcheck`, please see this issue. | ||
# xref: https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-smithy-feedstock/issues/248 | ||
- shellcheck | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yeah it is more documentation than anything There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. In that case, would a regular commented out dependency in the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There was some support for doing this above ( #246 (comment) ). So had made this change No strong feelings about other such changes There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Do we want to make a change here before merging or are we happy to merge? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm fine either way There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Cool, let's merge then. If we decide to handle this another way, we can do that in a new PR |
||
|
||
test: | ||
imports: | ||
|
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.
Added these to line up with upstream build requirements included in this release