Skip to content

Conversation

LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

This complements the discussion in #1050 that we should not allow some fields to be hard-coded. We should allow them in the context of overrides, so here is a rather convoluted way of adding that check.

This will also make it possible to extend it further if we want more specific checks for specific overrides matchers as well. E.g. we can add a restriction that build.requires cannot have @ in an sdist

@LecrisUT LecrisUT force-pushed the feat/no-hardcode-opts branch from a2504cc to 9922ae6 Compare May 14, 2025 15:13
@LecrisUT LecrisUT force-pushed the feat/no-hardcode-opts branch 3 times, most recently from 9a77549 to 417a6e7 Compare May 15, 2025 07:37
@henryiii henryiii force-pushed the feat/no-hardcode-opts branch 2 times, most recently from 53aed69 to f1a073a Compare July 3, 2025 21:45
@jcfr jcfr added this to the v0.12.0 milestone Sep 19, 2025
@jcfr jcfr force-pushed the feat/no-hardcode-opts branch from f1a073a to 4c114df Compare September 19, 2025 16:12
LecrisUT and others added 5 commits October 13, 2025 15:55
Used for further validations

Signed-off-by: Cristian Le <[email protected]>
Add `test_disallow_hardcoded` to cover these type of settings

Signed-off-by: Cristian Le <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Henry Schreiner <[email protected]>
@henryiii henryiii force-pushed the feat/no-hardcode-opts branch from 4c114df to 404adc4 Compare October 13, 2025 19:55
@jcfr
Copy link
Contributor

jcfr commented Oct 17, 2025

Following discussion with @henryiii during Note from community meeting. Ideally, the schema should be updated before integrating.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants