9986710...
by
Charlie Marsh <email address hidden>
Make self-update an opt-in Cargo feature (#2606)
## Summary
Ensures that (e.g.) installs from conda-forge, Homebrew, and other
distributions don't expose `uv self update` at all.
We'll still show `uv self update` for `pip install uv`, but it will fail
with a good error. Removing the `uv self update` from `pip`-installed
`uv` is more complicated, since we'd need to build separately for the
installer vs. for PyPI.
Closes #2588.
0ea51d4...
by
Charlie Marsh <email address hidden>
Add progress reporting for named requirement resolution (#2605)
31743f2...
by
Charlie Marsh <email address hidden>
Use PEP 517 build hooks to resolve unnamed requirements (#2604)
5d7d7dc...
by
Charlie Marsh <email address hidden>
Enable PEP 517 builds for unnamed requirements (#2600)
## Summary
This PR enables the source distribution database to be used with unnamed
requirements (i.e., URLs without a package name). The (significant)
upside here is that we can now use PEP 517 hooks to resolve unnamed
requirement metadata _and_ reuse any computation in the cache.
The changes to `crates/uv-distribution/src/source/mod.rs` are quite
extensive, but mostly mechanical. The core idea is that we introduce a
new `BuildableSource` abstraction, which can either be a distribution,
or an unnamed URL:
```rust
/// A reference to a source that can be built into a built distribution.
///
/// This can either be a distribution (e.g., a package on a registry) or a direct URL.
///
/// Distributions can _also_ point to URLs in lieu of a registry; however, the primary distinction
/// here is that a distribution will always include a package name, while a URL will not.
#[derive(Debug, Clone, Copy)]
pub enum BuildableSource<'a> {
Dist(&'a SourceDist),
Url(SourceUrl<'a>),
}
```
All the methods on the source distribution database now accept
`BuildableSource`. `BuildableSource` has a `name()` method, but it
returns `Option<&PackageName>`, and everything is required to work with
and without a package name.
The main drawback of this approach (which isn't a terrible one) is that
we can no longer include the package name in the cache. (We do continue
to use the package name for registry-based distributions, since those
always have a name.). The package name was included in the cache route
for two reasons: (1) it's nice for debugging; and (2) we use it to power
`uv cache clean flask`, to identify the entries that are relevant for
Flask.
To solve this, I changed the `uv cache clean` code to look one level
deeper. So, when we want to determine whether to remove the cache entry
for a given URL, we now look into the directory to see if there are any
wheels that match the package name. This isn't as nice, but it does work
(and we have test coverage for it -- all passing).
I also considered removing the package name from the cache routes for
non-registry _wheels_, for consistency... But, it would require a cache
bump, and it didn't feel important enough to merit that.
12192dd...
by
Charlie Marsh <email address hidden>
