Skip to content
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

Conversation

slafs
Copy link
Contributor

@slafs slafs commented Jan 7, 2020

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 by moto.s3 module only).

Things to discuss/decide:

  • is this approach even feasible for @spulec
  • do we still need botocore.awsrequest and ConnectionCls fix in moto/__init__.py (why do we need it anyway)?
  • do we want to include ALL services in extras_require (in setup.py) i.e. even those that don't need any additional requirements (future-proof)?
  • can we trim down more dependencies (i.e. remove any from install_requires still, e.g. werkzeug or Jinja2)?

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jan 7, 2020

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.003%) to 94.372% when pulling 2c8d126 on slafs:moto-1728/dependencies-overhead-backwards-compat into 2433d64 on spulec:master.

@slafs slafs force-pushed the moto-1728/dependencies-overhead-backwards-compat branch 5 times, most recently from 0f5c51c to 02eb730 Compare February 11, 2020 22:19
@slafs slafs force-pushed the moto-1728/dependencies-overhead-backwards-compat branch from 02eb730 to 1fe01cf Compare May 31, 2020 16:35
@slafs slafs mentioned this pull request May 31, 2020
5 tasks
@slafs slafs force-pushed the moto-1728/dependencies-overhead-backwards-compat branch from 1fe01cf to 03a0601 Compare May 31, 2020 16:52
slafs added 3 commits May 31, 2020 18:58
between rds/rds2 and cloudformation modules

Similar to 9c13798.
Make sure that `travis_moto_server.sh` script
actually installs `all` and `server` extras.
@slafs slafs force-pushed the moto-1728/dependencies-overhead-backwards-compat branch from 03a0601 to 2c8d126 Compare May 31, 2020 16:59
@slafs
Copy link
Contributor Author

slafs commented May 31, 2020

@spulec I'd love some feedback/guidance on this approach.

@slafs slafs changed the title Moto 1728/dependencies overhead backwards compat Fix #1728 by introducing per-service extras_require May 31, 2020
@spulec
Copy link
Collaborator

spulec commented Jul 26, 2020

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.

@davidszotten
Copy link
Contributor

@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)

@spulec
Copy link
Collaborator

spulec commented Sep 4, 2020

Closing in favor of #3281

Thanks for the help!

@spulec spulec closed this Sep 4, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants