#6476 has recently added (https://github.com/feast-dev/feast/pull/6476/changes#diff-50c86b7ed8ac2cf95bd48334961bf0530cdc77b5a56f852c5c61b89d735fd711L26) the following lines to pyproject.toml:
|
"pyarrow>=21.0.0; extra != 'flink'", |
|
"pyarrow>=16.1.0,<21.0.0; extra == 'flink'", |
The extra != 'flink'" of this does not work as expected: Neither pip or uv support extra != markers, with uv first evaluating feast on its own without the base package and pip always evaluating it to true. As we're in the process of formally removing extra != due to being broken by design (https://discuss.python.org/t/ban-negative-extras-for-extras-marker/108022), we found this one usage and wanted give you a heads up about this feature being broken.
When you try to [uv] pip install feast[flink], it currently downgrades to installing 0.63.0, to avoid the unsatisfiable 0.64.0.
CC @XuananLe
#6476 has recently added (https://github.com/feast-dev/feast/pull/6476/changes#diff-50c86b7ed8ac2cf95bd48334961bf0530cdc77b5a56f852c5c61b89d735fd711L26) the following lines to pyproject.toml:
feast/pyproject.toml
Lines 26 to 27 in f296d4b
The
extra != 'flink'"of this does not work as expected: Neither pip or uv supportextra !=markers, with uv first evaluatingfeaston its own without the base package and pip always evaluating it to true. As we're in the process of formally removingextra !=due to being broken by design (https://discuss.python.org/t/ban-negative-extras-for-extras-marker/108022), we found this one usage and wanted give you a heads up about this feature being broken.When you try to
[uv] pip install feast[flink], it currently downgrades to installing 0.63.0, to avoid the unsatisfiable 0.64.0.CC @XuananLe