Initially, we were limiting Git schemes to HTTPS and SSH as only
supported schemes. We lost this validation in #3429. This incidentally
allowed file schemes, which apparently work with Git out of the box.
A caveat for this is that in tool.uv.sources, we parse the git field
always as URL. This caused a problem with #11425: repo = { git =
'c:\path\to\repo', rev = "xxxxx" } was parsed as a URL where c: is the
scheme, causing a bad error message down the line.
This PR:
* Puts Git URL validation back in place. It bans everything but HTTPS,
SSH, and file URLs. This could be a breaking change, if users were using
a git transport protocol were not aware of, even though never
intentionally supported.
* Allows file: URL in Git: This seems to be supported by Git and we were
supporting it albeit unintentionally, so it's reasonable to continue to
support it.
* It does not allow relative paths in the git field in tool.uv.sources.
Absolute file URLs are supported, whether we want relative file URLs for
Git too should be discussed separately.
Closes#3429: We reject the input with a proper error message, while
hinting the user towards file:. If there's still desire for relative
path support, we can keep it open.
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
We want to build `uv-build` without depending on the network crates. In
preparation for that, we split uv-git into uv-git and uv-git-types,
where only uv-git depends on reqwest, so that uv-build can use
uv-git-types.
## Summary
This PR revives https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/pull/10017, which might
be viable now that we _don't_ enforce any platforms by default.
The basic idea here is that users can mark certain platforms as required
(empty, by default). When resolving, we ensure that the specified
platforms have wheel coverage, backtracking if not.
For example, to require that we include a version of PyTorch that
supports Intel macOS:
```toml
[project]
name = "project"
version = "0.1.0"
requires-python = ">=3.11"
dependencies = ["torch>1.13"]
[tool.uv]
required-platforms = [
"sys_platform == 'darwin' and platform_machine == 'x86_64'"
]
```
Other than that, the forking is identical to past iterations of this PR.
This would give users a way to resolve the tail of issues in #9711, but
with manual opt-in to supporting specific platforms.
We added this to help with resolving some specific packages, and for
parity with Poetry. But in some cases, this metadata is just wrong, and
at the very least it's unreliable.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/8989.
Closes#10945.
## Summary
Just a logic issue... If we see a dynamic field that isn't `"version"`,
we end up _not_ propagating the fact that `"version"` is also dynamic.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/11460.
## Summary
We should only be ignoring changes in `version` for dynamic projects;
for static projects, it should still be enforced. We should also be
invalidating the lockfile if a project goes from static to dynamic or
vice versa.
Closes#10852.
## Summary
This PR modifies the lockfile to omit versions for source trees that use
`dynamic` versioning, thereby enabling projects to use dynamic
versioning with `uv.lock`.
Prior to this change, dynamic versioning was largely incompatible with
locking, especially for popular tools like `setuptools_scm` -- in that
case, every commit bumps the version, so every commit invalidates the
committed lockfile.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/7533.
## Summary
This now looks like:
```
error: Failed to parse: `pyproject.toml`
Caused by: TOML parse error at line 1, column 1
|
1 | [project]
| ^^^^^^^^^
`pyproject.toml` is using the `[project]` table, but the required `project.version` field is neither set nor present in the `project.dynamic` list
```
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/9910.
## Summary
This has been bothering me a bit: `uv pip install "foo @
https://github.com/user/foo"` fails, telling you that it doesn't end in
a supported extension. But we should be able to tell you that it looks
like a Git repo.
This PR adds a notion of "conflict markers" to the lock file as an
attempt to address #9289. The idea is to encode a new kind of boolean
expression indicating how to choose dependencies based on which extras
are activated.
As an example of what conflict markers look like, consider one of the
cases
brought up in #9289, where `anyio` had unconditional dependencies on
two different versions of `idna`. Now, those are gated by markers, like
this:
```toml
[[package]]
name = "anyio"
version = "4.3.0"
source = { registry = "https://pypi.org/simple" }
dependencies = [
{ name = "idna", version = "3.5", source = { registry = "https://pypi.org/simple" }, marker = "extra == 'extra-7-project-foo'" },
{ name = "idna", version = "3.6", source = { registry = "https://pypi.org/simple" }, marker = "extra == 'extra-7-project-bar' or extra != 'extra-7-project-foo'" },
{ name = "sniffio" },
]
```
The odd extra values like `extra-7-project-foo` are an encoding of not
just the conflicting extra (`foo`) but also the package it's declared
for (`project`). We need both bits of information because different
packages may have the same extra name, even if they are completely
unrelated. The `extra-` part is a prefix to distinguish it from groups
(which, in this case, would be encoded as `group-7-project-foo` if `foo`
were a dependency group). And the `7` part indicates the length of the
package name which makes it possible to parse out the package and extra
name from this encoding. (We don't actually utilize that property, but
it seems like good sense to do it in case we do need to extra
information from these markers.)
While this preserves PEP 508 compatibility at a surface level, it does
require utilizing this encoding scheme in order
to evaluate them when they're present (which only occurs when
conflicting extras/groups are declared).
My sense is that the most complex part of this change is not just adding
conflict markers, but their simplification. I tried to address this in
the code comments and commit messages.
Reviewers should look at this commit-by-commit.
Fixes#9289, Fixes#9546, Fixes#9640, Fixes#9622, Fixes#9498, Fixes
#9701, Fixes#9734
## Summary
Sort of ridiculous, but today this passes, when it should fail:
```toml
[project]
name = "foo"
version = "0.1.0"
description = "Add your description here"
readme = "README.md"
requires-python = ">=3.13.0"
dependencies = []
[project.optional-dependencies]
async = [
"foo[async]==0.2.0",
]
```
When encountering `dynamic = ["version"]` in the pyproject.toml of a
source dist, we can ignore that and treat it as a statically known
metadata distribution, since the filename tells us the version and that
version must not change on build.
This fixed locking PyGObject 3.50.0 from `pygobject-3.50.0.tar.gz`
(minimized):
```toml
[project]
name = "PyGObject"
description = "Python bindings for GObject Introspection"
requires-python = ">=3.9, <4.0"
dependencies = [
"pycairo>=1.16"
]
dynamic = ["version"]
```
Afterwards, `uv add --no-sync toga` passes on Ubuntu 24.04 without the
pygobject build deps, when previously it needed `{ name = "pygobject",
version = "3.50.0", requires-dist = [], requires-python = ">=3.9" }`.
I've added a check that source distribution versions are respected after
build.
Fixes#9548
## Summary
Today, our dependency group implementation is a little awkward... For
each package `P`, we check if `P` contains dependencies for each enabled
group, then add a dependency on `P` with the group enabled. There are a
few issues here:
1. It's sort of backwards... We add a dependency from the base package
`P` to `P` with the group enabled. Then `P` with the group enabled adds
a dependency on the base package.
2. We can't, e.g., enable different groups for different packages. (We
don't have a way for users to specify this on the CLI, but there's no
reason that it should be _impossible_ in the resolver.)
3. It's inconsistent with how extras work, which leads to confusing
differences in the resolver.
Instead, our internal requirement type can now include dependency
groups, which makes dependency groups look much, much more like extras
in the resolver.
## Summary
A lot of good new lints, and most importantly, error stabilizations. I
tried to find a few usages of the new stabilizations, but I'm sure there
are more.
IIUC, this _does_ require bumping our MSRV.
## Summary
We still only respect overrides and constraints in the workspace root --
which we may want to change -- but overrides and constraints are now
correctly lowered.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/8148.
## Summary
This was an oversight in the initial implementation. We shouldn't
validate sources for the `build-system.requires` field, since extras and
groups can _never_ be active.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/9259.
## Summary
This PR enables something like the "final boss" of PyTorch setups --
explicit support for CPU vs. GPU-enabled variants via extras:
```toml
[project]
name = "project"
version = "0.1.0"
requires-python = ">=3.13.0"
dependencies = []
[project.optional-dependencies]
cpu = [
"torch==2.5.1+cpu",
]
gpu = [
"torch==2.5.1",
]
[tool.uv.sources]
torch = [
{ index = "torch-cpu", extra = "cpu" },
{ index = "torch-gpu", extra = "gpu" },
]
[[tool.uv.index]]
name = "torch-cpu"
url = "https://download.pytorch.org/whl/cpu"
explicit = true
[[tool.uv.index]]
name = "torch-gpu"
url = "https://download.pytorch.org/whl/cu124"
explicit = true
[tool.uv]
conflicts = [
[
{ extra = "cpu" },
{ extra = "gpu" },
],
]
```
It builds atop the conflicting extras work to allow sources to be marked
as specific to a dedicated extra being enabled or disabled.
As part of this work, sources now have an `extra` field. If a source has
an `extra`, it means that the source is only applied to the requirement
when defined within that optional group. For example, `{ index =
"torch-cpu", extra = "cpu" }` above only applies to
`"torch==2.5.1+cpu"`.
The `extra` field does _not_ mean that the source is "enabled" when the
extra is activated. For example, this wouldn't work:
```toml
[project]
name = "project"
version = "0.1.0"
requires-python = ">=3.13.0"
dependencies = ["torch"]
[tool.uv.sources]
torch = [
{ index = "torch-cpu", extra = "cpu" },
{ index = "torch-gpu", extra = "gpu" },
]
[[tool.uv.index]]
name = "torch-cpu"
url = "https://download.pytorch.org/whl/cpu"
explicit = true
[[tool.uv.index]]
name = "torch-gpu"
url = "https://download.pytorch.org/whl/cu124"
explicit = true
```
In this case, the sources would effectively be ignored. Extras are
really confusing... but I think this is correct? We don't want enabling
or disabling extras to affect resolution information that's _outside_ of
the relevant optional group.
## Summary
These were moved as part of a broader refactor to create a single
integration test module. That "single integration test module" did
indeed have a big impact on compile times, which is great! But we aren't
seeing any benefit from moving these tests into their own files (despite
the claim in [this blog
post](https://matklad.github.io/2021/02/27/delete-cargo-integration-tests.html),
I see the same compilation pattern regardless of where the tests are
located). Plus, we don't have many of these, and same-file tests is such
a strong Rust convention.
This adds support for providing conflicting group names in addition to
extra names to `Conflicts`.
This merely makes "room" for it in the types while keeping everything
working. We'll add proper support for it in the next commit.
Note that one interesting trick we do here is depend directly on
`hashbrown` so that we can make use of its `Equivalent` trait. This in
turn lets us use things like `ConflictItemRef` as a lookup key for a
hashset that contains `ConflictItem`. This mirrors using a `&str` as a
lookup key for a hashset that contains `String`, but works for arbitrary
types. `std` doesn't support this, but `hashbrown` does. This trick in
turn lets us simplify some of our data structures.
This also rejiggers some of the serde-interaction with the conflicting
types. We now use a wire type to represent our conflicting items for
more flexibility. i.e., Support `extra` XOR `group` fields.
Since this is intended to support _both_ groups and extras, it doesn't
make sense to just name it for groups. And since there isn't really a
word that encapsulates both "extra" and "group," we just fall back to
the super general "conflicts."
We'll rename the variables and other things in the next commit.
This PR adds support for conflicting extras. For example, consider
some optional dependencies like this:
```toml
[project.optional-dependencies]
project1 = ["numpy==1.26.3"]
project2 = ["numpy==1.26.4"]
```
These dependency specifications are not compatible with one another.
And if you ask uv to lock these, you'll get an unresolvable error.
With this PR, you can now add this to your `pyproject.toml` to get
around this:
```toml
[tool.uv]
conflicting-groups = [
[
{ package = "project", extra = "project1" },
{ package = "project", extra = "project2" },
],
]
```
This will make the universal resolver create additional forks
internally that keep the dependencies from the `project1` and
`project2` extras separate. And we make all of this work by reporting
an error at **install** time if one tries to install with two or more
extras that have been declared as conflicting. (If we didn't do this,
it would be possible to try and install two different versions of the
same package into the same environment.)
This PR does *not* add support for conflicting **groups**, but it is
intended to add support in a follow-up PR.
Closes#6981Fixes#8024
Ref #6729, Ref #6830
This should also hopefully unblock
https://github.com/dagster-io/dagster/pull/23814, but in my testing, I
did run into other problems (specifically, with `pywin`). But it does
resolve the problem with incompatible dependencies in two different
extras once you declare `test-airflow-1` and `test-airflow-2` as
conflicting for `dagster-airflow`.
NOTE: This PR doesn't make `conflicting-groups` public yet. And in a
follow-up PR, I plan to switch the name to `conflicts` instead of
`conflicting-groups`, since it will be able to accept conflicting extras
_and_ conflicting groups.
