Conversation
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the You can disable this status message by setting the ✨ Finishing touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think setup.py can be removed soon?
seut
left a comment
seut
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't this more related to https://peps.python.org/pep-0639/? Afaik we used SPDX expressions even before. I'd suggest to update the commit message to reflect this.
pyproject.toml
Outdated
| readme = "README.rst" | ||
| license = { file = "LICENSE"} | ||
| license = "Apache-2.0" | ||
| license_files = ["LICENSE"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
According to https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/guides/licensing-examples-and-user-scenarios/ there is no need to explicitly define license_files or license_file?
| license_files = ["LICENSE"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've adjusted the commit message, and removed the license_files attribute. The outcome in core metadata is the same with both variants.
Adjust package metadata to be compliant with PEP 639. It was also suggested by warning messages emitted by `python -m build`. - https://peps.python.org/pep-0639/
amotl
changed the title
2 participants
Just maintenance.