Avoid preferring constrained over unconstrained packages (#3148)
## Summary pip prefers somewhat-constrained over unconstrained packages... but only if they're at equal depths in the tree. We don't have a way to track the latter property yet (I've added a TODO), so for now, we should remove this constraint -- it seems to be counter-productive. I've filed https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/3149 as a follow-up. Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/3143 ## Test Plan - `git clone https://github.com/drivendataorg/zamba.git` - `cat "-e .[tests]" > req.in` - `cargo run venv && cargo run pip compile req.in --refresh -n --python-platform linux --python-version 3.8`
This commit is contained in:
Charlie Marsh
@@ -33,9 +33,8 @@ impl PubGrubPriorities {
|
||||
std::collections::hash_map::Entry::Occupied(mut entry) => {
|
||||
// Preserve the original index.
|
||||
let index = match entry.get() {
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Unspecified(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Singleton(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Unconstrained(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Constrained(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::DirectUrl(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Root => next,
|
||||
};
|
||||
@@ -43,10 +42,8 @@ impl PubGrubPriorities {
|
||||
// Compute the priority.
|
||||
let priority = if version.as_singleton().is_some() {
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Singleton(Reverse(index))
|
||||
} else if version == &Range::full() {
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Unconstrained(Reverse(index))
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Constrained(Reverse(index))
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Unspecified(Reverse(index))
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
// Take the maximum of the new and existing priorities.
|
||||
@@ -58,10 +55,8 @@ impl PubGrubPriorities {
|
||||
// Insert the priority.
|
||||
entry.insert(if version.as_singleton().is_some() {
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Singleton(Reverse(next))
|
||||
} else if version == &Range::full() {
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Unconstrained(Reverse(next))
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Constrained(Reverse(next))
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Unspecified(Reverse(next))
|
||||
});
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -71,9 +66,8 @@ impl PubGrubPriorities {
|
||||
std::collections::hash_map::Entry::Occupied(mut entry) => {
|
||||
// Preserve the original index.
|
||||
let index = match entry.get() {
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Unspecified(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Singleton(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Unconstrained(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Constrained(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::DirectUrl(Reverse(index)) => *index,
|
||||
PubGrubPriority::Root => next,
|
||||
};
|
||||
@@ -112,10 +106,10 @@ pub(crate) enum PubGrubPriority {
|
||||
///
|
||||
/// As such, its priority is based on the order in which the packages were added (FIFO), such
|
||||
/// that the first package we visit is prioritized over subsequent packages.
|
||||
Unconstrained(Reverse<usize>),
|
||||
|
||||
/// The version range is constrained in some way (e.g., with a `<=` or `>` operator).
|
||||
Constrained(Reverse<usize>),
|
||||
///
|
||||
/// TODO(charlie): Prefer constrained over unconstrained packages, if they're at the same depth
|
||||
/// in the dependency graph.
|
||||
Unspecified(Reverse<usize>),
|
||||
|
||||
/// The version range is constrained to a single version (e.g., with the `==` operator).
|
||||
Singleton(Reverse<usize>),
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -460,14 +460,7 @@ fn dependency_excludes_range_of_compatible_versions() {
|
||||
╰─▶ Because package-a==1.0.0 depends on package-b==1.0.0 and only the following versions of package-a are available:
|
||||
package-a==1.0.0
|
||||
package-a>=2.0.0,<=3.0.0
|
||||
we can conclude that package-a<2.0.0 depends on package-b==1.0.0.
|
||||
And because package-a==3.0.0 depends on package-b==3.0.0, we can conclude that any of:
|
||||
package-a<2.0.0
|
||||
package-a>=3.0.0
|
||||
depends on one of:
|
||||
package-b<=1.0.0
|
||||
package-b>=3.0.0
|
||||
(1)
|
||||
we can conclude that package-a<2.0.0 depends on package-b==1.0.0. (1)
|
||||
|
||||
Because only the following versions of package-c are available:
|
||||
package-c==1.0.0
|
||||
@@ -477,13 +470,8 @@ fn dependency_excludes_range_of_compatible_versions() {
|
||||
package-a<2.0.0
|
||||
package-a>=3.0.0
|
||||
|
||||
And because we know from (1) that any of:
|
||||
package-a<2.0.0
|
||||
package-a>=3.0.0
|
||||
depends on one of:
|
||||
package-b<=1.0.0
|
||||
package-b>=3.0.0
|
||||
we can conclude that all versions of package-c depend on one of:
|
||||
And because we know from (1) that package-a<2.0.0 depends on package-b==1.0.0, we can conclude that package-a!=3.0.0, all versions of package-c, package-b!=1.0.0 are incompatible.
|
||||
And because package-a==3.0.0 depends on package-b==3.0.0, we can conclude that all versions of package-c depend on one of:
|
||||
package-b<=1.0.0
|
||||
package-b>=3.0.0
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -597,14 +585,7 @@ fn dependency_excludes_non_contiguous_range_of_compatible_versions() {
|
||||
╰─▶ Because package-a==1.0.0 depends on package-b==1.0.0 and only the following versions of package-a are available:
|
||||
package-a==1.0.0
|
||||
package-a>=2.0.0,<=3.0.0
|
||||
we can conclude that package-a<2.0.0 depends on package-b==1.0.0.
|
||||
And because package-a==3.0.0 depends on package-b==3.0.0, we can conclude that any of:
|
||||
package-a<2.0.0
|
||||
package-a>=3.0.0
|
||||
depends on one of:
|
||||
package-b<=1.0.0
|
||||
package-b>=3.0.0
|
||||
(1)
|
||||
we can conclude that package-a<2.0.0 depends on package-b==1.0.0. (1)
|
||||
|
||||
Because only the following versions of package-c are available:
|
||||
package-c==1.0.0
|
||||
@@ -614,13 +595,8 @@ fn dependency_excludes_non_contiguous_range_of_compatible_versions() {
|
||||
package-a<2.0.0
|
||||
package-a>=3.0.0
|
||||
|
||||
And because we know from (1) that any of:
|
||||
package-a<2.0.0
|
||||
package-a>=3.0.0
|
||||
depends on one of:
|
||||
package-b<=1.0.0
|
||||
package-b>=3.0.0
|
||||
we can conclude that all versions of package-c depend on one of:
|
||||
And because we know from (1) that package-a<2.0.0 depends on package-b==1.0.0, we can conclude that all versions of package-c, package-a!=3.0.0, package-b!=1.0.0 are incompatible.
|
||||
And because package-a==3.0.0 depends on package-b==3.0.0, we can conclude that all versions of package-c depend on one of:
|
||||
package-b<=1.0.0
|
||||
package-b>=3.0.0
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -3355,8 +3331,10 @@ fn transitive_prerelease_and_stable_dependency_many_versions() {
|
||||
|
||||
----- stderr -----
|
||||
× No solution found when resolving dependencies:
|
||||
╰─▶ Because only package-c<2.0.0b1 is available and package-a==1.0.0 depends on package-c>=2.0.0b1, we can conclude that package-a==1.0.0 cannot be used.
|
||||
And because only package-a==1.0.0 is available and you require package-a, we can conclude that the requirements are unsatisfiable.
|
||||
╰─▶ Because only package-a==1.0.0 is available and package-a==1.0.0 depends on package-c>=2.0.0b1, we can conclude that all versions of package-a depend on package-c>=2.0.0b1.
|
||||
And because only package-c<2.0.0b1 is available, we can conclude that all versions of package-a depend on package-c>3.0.0.
|
||||
And because package-b==1.0.0 depends on package-c and only package-b==1.0.0 is available, we can conclude that all versions of package-b and all versions of package-a are incompatible.
|
||||
And because you require package-a and you require package-b, we can conclude that the requirements are unsatisfiable.
|
||||
|
||||
hint: package-c was requested with a pre-release marker (e.g., package-c>=2.0.0b1), but pre-releases weren't enabled (try: `--prerelease=allow`)
|
||||
"###);
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user