Fix inconsistent examples in dependency resolution docs #13561
Conversation
|
Hi, I’ve added the changelog entry and all checks are passing now. This PR clarifies the dependency resolution docs with consistent examples. Please let me know if further changes are needed. |
|
@meet-vasita Thanks for your PR, I will try and review it soon but be aware I am not sure when I will exactly have time. |
|
Thanks for the update! No worries, I’ll wait for your review. Please let me know if there’s anything I should improve in the meantime. |
|
Hi @notatallshaw, hope you're doing well! Wanted to follow up on this PR, it's my first open source contribution so I'm eager to get it right. Let me know if there's anything else I should address. Thanks for your patience! |
|
Hi @meet-vasita, I'm on vacation right now and I'm not sure exactly when I will be able to review, it will at latest be before pip 25.3 (released at the end of October), but likely some time in the next couple of weeks. |
|
Hi @notatallshaw, thanks a lot for the update! 🙏 No worries at all, I completely understand. I really appreciate you taking the time to review when you’re back. Wishing you a great vacation! 🌟 |
Fixes the Issue #12583
This PR updates the dependency resolution documentation to make it clearer and more consistent. I added a note explaining that package_coffee, package_tea, and package_water are imaginary examples, so readers don’t mistake them for real packages. I also fixed a version mismatch in the “Loosen your top level requirements” section to ensure the examples are consistent. Finally, I added an introduction line at the start of the section to clarify upfront that the examples use fictional package names.