cookie
cookie copied to clipboard
Scientific Python Library Development Guide and Cookiecutter
It would be great if there were an Action, like dependabot, for updating a repo that uses this template. E.g. https://github.com/OpenAstronomy/packaging-guide/blob/main/%7B%7B%20cookiecutter.package_name%20%7D%7D/.github/workflows/sub_package_update.yml
Thanks for the great package, I use it frequently. It would be great if the test matrix came with `uv`'s ``--resolution=lowest-direct`` for testing the minimum versions of all dependencies. Right...
I think it should be viable to have Renovate or dependabot to manage updates. If you aren't aware it's a highly configurable dependency manager https://docs.renovatebot.com.
Currently, creating a project from the template with a repository target hosted on gitlab results in an unnecessary `.github` folder and no dependabot implementation in `.gitlab-ci.yml`. This could be fixed...
Hi, running a setuptools/pybind11 project in Gitlab-CI ([v17.1.2-ee](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/tags/v17.1.2-ee)) leads to following YAML analysis error: > jobs:make_wheels config contains unknown keys: matrix It seems, that `matrix` is not a valid keyword...
Bumps the actions group with 2 updates: [actions/download-artifact](https://github.com/actions/download-artifact) and [actions/upload-artifact](https://github.com/actions/upload-artifact). Updates `actions/download-artifact` from 6 to 7 Release notes Sourced from actions/download-artifact's releases. v7.0.0 v7 - What's new [!IMPORTANT] actions/download-artifact@v7 now...
Update the versions mentioned in the docs pages. PR generated by "Update dependencies" [workflow](https://github.com/scientific-python/cookie/actions/runs/20222166973). ---- 📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://scientific-python-cookie--727.org.readthedocs.build/
I'm in the process of removing/forbiding the run of mypy via pre-commit/hatch on jupyter_client and likely other places as running via pre-commit/hach can (often?) swallow error. try to clone jupyter...
We've included it in sp-repo-review's checks as an alternative for quite a while, but after @mikeckennedy brought it up on Python Bytes, I though we could add it as a...
We should make sure the generated output passes sp-repo-review (in-development version). > Ahh, since we don't add this, the "check noxfile" check doesn't check repo-review. It think I thought it...