-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
Fix #1728 by introducing per-service extras_require #2676
Fix #1728 by introducing per-service extras_require #2676
Conversation
0f5c51c
to
02eb730
Compare
02eb730
to
1fe01cf
Compare
1fe01cf
to
03a0601
Compare
between rds/rds2 and cloudformation modules Similar to 9c13798.
Make sure that `travis_moto_server.sh` script actually installs `all` and `server` extras.
03a0601
to
2c8d126
Compare
@spulec I'd love some feedback/guidance on this approach. |
Thanks for opening this! I think this approach makes sense. For questions 2 and 3, I think the answer is no. RE trim down more dependencies: probably. If you want to do that, happy to accept it, but also think we could merge with something like this. |
@slafs are you still interested? are you planning to update this patch (at least to resolve the conflicts)? (if not i might take a stab) |
Closing in favor of #3281 Thanks for the help! |
This is the initial approach of fixing #1728 i.e. resolve the dependencies overhead and allow for installing minimal set of dependencies for a given service (e.g. when using only
s3
backend, install dependencies used bymoto.s3
module only).Things to discuss/decide:
botocore.awsrequest
andConnectionCls
fix inmoto/__init__.py
(why do we need it anyway)?extras_require
(insetup.py
) i.e. even those that don't need any additional requirements (future-proof)?install_requires
still, e.g. werkzeug or Jinja2)?