Phil Elson

Technically, I'm not sure #20 closed this issue, as we only added a function and method, not an operator. @tacaswell - did you want to take the discussion further?

Just trying out pyexchange for the first time. This particular example caught me out. It wasn't at all clear that `my_calendar` comes from `service.calendar()`.

Neat idea. 👍 A cheatsheet is another option. In the interest of not having issues sitting around, do you want to action something from this, or are you just wanting...

I saw #805, and wanted to highlight that there is a Wheel editing API in `setuptools-ext` (full disclosure: I have contributed to it in the past). That API also supports...

I just encountered exactly the same thing as seen by ``setuptools-ext`` - modifying the metadata in ``prepare_metadata_for_build_wheel`` would be super useful (and PEP-517 spec compliant). I'm guessing it isn't already...

Curiosity got the better of me, and I opened an issue in https://github.com/pypa/wheel/issues/611 and prototyped in https://github.com/pypa/wheel/pull/612. With proposed PR to ``wheel``, and the following change in ``setuptools``, ``build_wheel`` would...

``` abs root {'root': '.', 'relative_to': 'setuptools_scm/support/example/pyproject.toml'} file setuptools_scm/support/example/pyproject.toml root 'setuptools_scm/support/example' relative_to 'setuptools_scm/support/example/pyproject.toml' dist name: Thing version_from_ep setuptools_scm.parse_scm setuptools_scm/support/example looking for ep setuptools_scm.parse_scm setuptools_scm/support/example found ep EntryPoint(name='.git', value='setuptools_scm.git:parse', group='setuptools_scm.parse_scm') in...

Yes, this did it - thanks! Indeed, ensuring that the ``--long`` is always specified is essential to ensure that the logic in https://github.com/pypa/setuptools_scm/blob/fb261332d9b46aa5a258042d85baa5aa7b9f4fa2/src/setuptools_scm/git.py#L247-L253 is always valid. Having said that, I...

Closing since it is no longer in scope for wheel. (see https://github.com/pypa/wheel/issues/611#issuecomment-2125268578)

The follow-on test infrastructure has quite a cost, when compared to my proposal in https://github.com/SciTools/cf-units/issues/313#issuecomment-2348415886: > perhaps just vendoring the runtime (all 150kb of it) is the way to go?...