<!--
Thank you for contributing to uv! To help us out with reviewing, please
consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Document in guide stdin usage
alllll the easter eggs can do as well, but declined to keep consistent
with the other examples 😆
Additions to https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/pull/6481
```bash
$ uv run - <<EOF
import antigravity
EOF
```
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/pull/6519#issuecomment-2307371063 new PR
## Summary
Small keyword fix. In the `concepts/dependencies` documentation, the
workspace example listed members under an invalid
`tool.uv.workspace.include` field.
This PR changes the key to
[`tool.uv.workspace.members`](https://docs.astral.sh/uv/reference/settings/#workspace_members)
instead.
<!--
Thank you for contributing to uv! To help us out with reviewing, please
consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Two small typo fixes: one in the documentation and one in a comment in
the source code I happened to come across.
<!--
Thank you for contributing to uv! To help us out with reviewing, please
consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Updated docs dockerfile from Debian 11 (bullseye) to latest stable
Debian 12 (bookworm).
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
<!--
Thank you for contributing to uv! To help us out with reviewing, please
consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Docs at https://docs.astral.sh/uv/pip/compatibility/ still say:
> the future, uv will also support persistent configuration in its own
configuration file format (e.g., pyproject.toml or uv.toml or similar).
For more, see [#651](https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/651).
I think that's done now (?), so updated these to link to
https://docs.astral.sh/uv/configuration/files/
---------
Co-authored-by: Zanie Blue <contact@zanie.dev>
Docs show an underscore which should be a dash in dev-dependencies:
`dev_dependencies = ["ruff==0.5.0"]`
## Summary
I followed the example in the references settings and used
dev_dependencies in my pyproject.toml but it seems like this needs to be
a dash instead of an underscore:
=> ERROR [stage-0 5/5] RUN uv sync 6.9s
------
> [stage-0 5/5] RUN uv sync:
0.085 warning: Failed to parse `pyproject.toml` during settings
discovery:
0.085 TOML parse error at line 65, column 1
0.085 |
0.085 65 | [tool.uv]
0.085 | ^^^^^^^^^
0.085 unknown field `dev_dependencies`
0.085
<!--
Thank you for contributing to uv! To help us out with reviewing, please
consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
I think it's important to clarify that `uvx` is simply an alias for `uv
tool run`. This distinction helps avoid confusion about when to use `uv`
versus `uvx`. I thought the [blog
post](https://astral.sh/blog/uv-unified-python-packaging) explained this
well.
Just something that I ran into, I understand others may have a different
perspective!
## Test Plan
n/a
---------
Co-authored-by: Zanie Blue <contact@zanie.dev>
## Summary
resolves https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/5915, not entirely sure
if `manylinux_compatible` should be a separate field in the JSON
returned by the interpreter or there's some way to use the existing
`platform` for it.
## Test Plan
ran the below
```
rm -rf .venv
target/debug/uv venv
# commenting out the line below triggers the change..
# target/debug/uv pip install no-manylinux
target/debug/uv pip install cryptography --no-cache
```
is there an easy way to add this into the existing snapshot-based test
suite? looking around to see if there's a way that doesn't involve
something implementation-dependent like mocks.
~update: i think the output does differ between these two, so probably
we can use that.~ i lied - that "building..." output seems to be
discarded.
This is a fallback mode that we supported when we decided to use PEP 517
builds by default. I can't find a single reference to it on GitHub or in
our issue tracker, so I want to drop support for it as part of v0.3.0.
These are global and non-specific to the `pip` API, so I think they
should be elevated.
- Ran `UV_CONCURRENT_DOWNLOADS=1 cargo run pip list`; verified that
`downloads` resolved to 1.
- Added `concurrent-downloads = 5` under `[tool.uv]` in
`pyproject.toml`; ran `cargo run pip list`; verified that `downloads`
resolved to 5.
- Ran `UV_CONCURRENT_DOWNLOADS=1 cargo run pip list`; verified that
`downloads` resolved to 1.
- Removes "experimental" labels from command documentation
- Removes preview warnings
- Removes `PreviewMode` from most structs and methods — we could keep it
around but I figure we can propagate it again easily where needed in the
future
- Enables preview behavior by default everywhere, e.g., `uv venv` will
download Python versions
This PR migrates uv's use of `chrono` to `jiff`.
I did most of this work a while back as one of my tests to ensure Jiff
could actually be used in a real world project. I decided to revive
this because I noticed that `reqwest-retry` dropped its Chrono
dependency,
which is I believe the only other thing requiring Chrono in uv.
(Although, we use a fork of `reqwest-middleware` at present, and that
hasn't been updated to latest upstream yet. I wasn't quite sure of the
process we have for that.)
In course of doing this, I actually made two changes to uv:
First is that the lock file now writes an RFC 3339 timestamp for
`exclude-newer`. Previously, we were using Chrono's `Display`
implementation for this which is a non-standard but "human readable"
format. I think the right thing to do here is an RFC 3339 timestamp.
Second is that, in addition to an RFC 3339 timestamp, `--exclude-newer`
used to accept a "UTC date." But this PR changes it to a "local date."
That is, a date in the user's system configured time zone. I think
this makes more sense than a UTC date, but one alternative is to drop
support for a date and just rely on an RFC 3339 timestamp. The main
motivation here is that automatically assuming UTC is often somewhat
confusing, since just writing an unqualified date like `2024-08-19` is
often assumed to be interpreted relative to the writer's "local" time.
