-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
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
introduce sync
command
#9801
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
introduce sync
command
#9801
Conversation
969c737
to
df241e7
Compare
Deploy preview for website ready! ✅ Preview Built with commit 575ffb8. |
is it possible adding this to v1, too? |
No, I do not think so. We will probably only do another 1.x release if there is a critical issue and we will not include new features in that case. |
@radoering a point of note here; we have until now avoided or tried to avoid cases where we have 2 ways to do the same thing via the CLI. This definitely breaks that model (we actually might have already broken it). I do not have a strong opinion on this as long as the underlying code is clearly an alias and documented as such. Wanted to note this here and want to make sure this is intentional. |
df241e7
to
575ffb8
Compare
Agreed.
It stems from the wish of some users that I added a note with some additional information to the docs. |
I have to disagree. If this is to be just an alias, I don't see a reason to make this change. Splitting the behavior makes more sense to me. |
@Secrus I do not disagree. My point, to be clearer is, if we are duplicating functionality I am not (personally) strongly opposed to a clearly documented alias. If we were splitting functionality, that is perfectly fine too, as long as we deprecate/remove the original. Whatever we choose, we just need to be clear on what and why.
@radoering If it were up-to me, I would just enforce virtual environments and be done with it. But I am sure some containers-don't-need-venv-footgun-warriors will be up in arms. I am surprised the system-site-packages case is impacted, as we should not be touching those packages at all. But then again, I guess detection is not always the easiest. As I write this, I am weirdly becoming more opposed to the "sync" as a new command idea. I much rather have All that said, I am open to see what the consensus between the rest of the maintainers is and go with it. |
Pull Request Check List
As suggested in #9136 (comment). Still not sure about it and how much duplication in the docs would be needed.
Closes #9855