Refresh ProLIF metadata#385
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Member
Author
|
erf it's still installing 2.1.0, will try again tomorrow |
cbouy
force-pushed
the
refresh-prolif-metadata
branch
from
bb77815 to
6078cc5
Compare
Member
Author
|
@MDAnalysis/mdakits-reviewers ready for review! |
Member
|
I don't know how |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #384
Just updating the metadata file for ProLIF:
prolif[dev]extra in ProLIF, dev dependencies are now accessed throughuv's dependency groups (I don't think there's directuvsupport here though right?). Would pip-installinguvand switch to their syntax be acceptable?run_teststotest_dependenciesis ok, just sounded logical to me but no strong opinion there.