-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 287
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
add blog post about v1 recipe format #2450
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for conda-forge-previews ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
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.
This should go in blog/
more than news/
.
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.
One major comment is about how we phrase items around the format versus the tools that implement it. Basically, we should describe the format as improving on the old v0 format. Then at the end, we say that conda-forge supports the v1 format using rattler-build as the current default v1 build tool.
- The new recipe executes much faster, which is partially due to some design decisions (no more recursive evaluation) as well as due to rattler-build building on top of a modern re-implementation of the conda standards in Rust. | ||
- The log output of rattler-build is greatly improved, always showing the user what the final files in the package are and the final metadata. | ||
- Some features of conda-build, such as multiple outputs, had a lot of implicit behavior. We are fixing that in the v1 recipe. |
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.
These three bullet points need to separate out two distinct things, namely the format versus the tools that use the format.
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.
Not sure ... this blog post is about the integration in conda-forge and that relies on rattler-build a lot. This is not only about the v0 vs v1 format ...
Co-authored-by: jaimergp <jaimergp@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jaimergp <jaimergp@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jaimergp <jaimergp@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jaimergp <jaimergp@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jaimergp <jaimergp@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jaimergp <jaimergp@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jaimergp <jaimergp@users.noreply.github.com>
I don't mind this in particular, but I do think that the integration into conda-forge is very much related to rattler-build as well. And this blog post is mainly about the integration into conda-forge, not the recipe format. Also not sure what we want to achieve by detaching these things more? |
The two are not synonymous and that distinction should be made. |
PR Checklist:
docs/
orcommunity/
, you have added it to the sidebar in the corresponding_sidebar.json
file