Skip to content

Conversation

@abhishekmadan30
Copy link
Contributor

Closes #7

@abhishekmadan30 abhishekmadan30 requested a review from a team as a code owner July 31, 2025 15:50
@abhishekmadan30 abhishekmadan30 requested a review from Eijebong July 31, 2025 15:50
Copy link
Collaborator

@ahal ahal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice, I like this line of thinking!

Initially I was going to suggest an output format that includes the Python binary name, file path and version.. but then I realized we can use uv in the run-task script.

So instead of messing with all this, you can run uv python list --only-installed. This command will output exactly what I was thinking and more. Plus it'll find Pythons that aren't even on the $PATH!

It's possible for run-task to run in a context where uv isn't installed, so you'll have to have a check for that (see the other place in run-task that already uses uv to see how), I think in this case it's fine to just omit the extra logging.

@abhishekmadan30
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ahal , I also create another pr with the UV command as the main check, let me know which one would be better : https://github.com/taskcluster/taskgraph/pull/733/files

@abhishekmadan30 abhishekmadan30 requested a review from ahal August 6, 2025 18:49
@ahal
Copy link
Collaborator

ahal commented Aug 7, 2025

Thanks, I like the uv version better

Copy link
Collaborator

@ahal ahal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should go with the uv version

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.

Dump Python and other runtime info in run-task

2 participants