Declare packaging runtime dependency#43
Conversation
|
👋 Hello @glenn-jocher, thank you for submitting a
For more guidance, please refer to our Contributing Guide. Don't hesitate to leave a comment if you have any questions. Thank you for contributing to Ultralytics! 🚀 |
UltralyticsAssistant
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🔍 PR Review
Made with ❤️ by Ultralytics Actions
The change looks clean and appropriately scoped. Adding packaging to runtime dependencies matches the stated purpose of preventing missing-import failures during version parsing, and I don't see any genuine issues in the provided diff.
|
Closing per maintainer direction: keep the AGPL-3.0 license unchanged and do not reintroduce packaging as a declared dependency since it was omitted during the fork's pyproject migration. |
Summary
packagingtopyproject.tomlruntime dependenciesdcba3cbUpstream scan
Compared
ultralytics/CLIPagainstopenai/CLIPonmain:dcba3cbreplacespkg_resources.packagingwithpackaging.version; the fork already has the code change, but was missing the declared runtime dependency. This PR adds it.ded190aupdates upstreamsetup.py; not applicable because the fork has moved packaging metadata topyproject.tomland no longer hassetup.py.d05afc4pins upstream.github/workflows/test.ymlactions; not applicable directly because the fork replaced that workflow with its ownci.yml/Ultralytics Actions workflows.Validation
pyproject.tomland assertedpackagingis declaredpython -m compileall -q clip testspython - <<'PY'import smoke forclip.available_models()git diff --check🛠️ PR Summary
Made with ❤️ by Ultralytics Actions
🌟 Summary
➕ This PR adds the
packagingdependency toultralytics/CLIPso the project can reliably handle PyTorch version compatibility checks.📊 Key Changes
packagingtopyproject.tomldependencies.🎯 Purpose & Impact