Arjun Verma

> Sorry, I should have been more clear. A screenshot or even your testimony would have been sufficient. I just want to make sure if we make a change here,...

A build workflow has already been created for both `ragna` & `ragna-base` in #405 which can further be extended to publish the built wheels plus the same can be documented...

Hi @pmeier, I'm not sure if I should be giving my opinion on an Issue labelled as `RFD: Decision Making` but I really like this idea of giving user the...

Thanks for the suggestion @hameerabbasi but in Philip's [comment](https://github.com/Quansight/ragna/issues/397#issue-2268733946) above: > The core postfix, e.g. botocore or pydantic-core is not really an option, since we already have a ragna.core namespace...

> @arjxn-py You can go ahead and send a PoC PR to have the two packages. If we have that we can decide on a release workflow. Hi, I've already...

> I realized we haven't written down exactly what we want to achieve. So here it is No worries, as the good thing is that I've been already working with...

I'll make sure that this particular requirement also fulfills by testing it on my fork's poc branch. Although I'm still WIP with shim `setup.py` (It's not behaving as expected at...

Yeah, fixed on my end too

> I don't think we can avoid that. Quoting from the [`setuptools` documentation](https://setuptools.pypa.io/en/latest/userguide/pyproject_config.html#dynamic-metadata) I wonder if you're suggesting for a monorepo architecture, that is absolutely possible. So I guess we'll...

> Could you elaborate what you want to test? Do you mean our test suite or something else? Yes, I was thinking that the test suite might break in case...