Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Compatibility with conda-lock? #682

Closed
2 tasks done
epassaro opened this issue Jun 2, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed
2 tasks done

Compatibility with conda-lock? #682

epassaro opened this issue Jun 2, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
locked [bot] locked due to inactivity type::feature request for a new feature or capability

Comments

@epassaro
Copy link

epassaro commented Jun 2, 2023

Checklist

  • I added a descriptive title
  • I searched open requests and couldn't find a duplicate

What is the idea?

Currently constructor is not compatible with .lock files rendered by conda-lock for two reasons:

  1. constructor does not ignore the @EXPLICIT line
  2. The environment is still solved, this shouldn't be necessary

Why is this needed?

No response

What should happen?

No response

Additional Context

No response
@epassaro epassaro added the type::feature request for a new feature or capability label Jun 2, 2023
@jaimergp
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @epassaro, I think #477 added support for explicit TXT files if you want to give it a try from main. v3.4.5 will include this, to be cut soon.

@epassaro
Copy link
Author

epassaro commented Jul 24, 2023 via email

@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked [bot] locked due to inactivity label Jul 24, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 24, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
locked [bot] locked due to inactivity type::feature request for a new feature or capability
Projects
🧭 Planning
Archived in project
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@jaimergp @epassaro