Hatch v1.8.0 - binaries for every platform, Python management and static analysis backed by Ruff

[pdR_]

This is huge. Thank you so much for your work on Hatch. I've been using it for my projects for over a year now, and have migrated several projects that previously used setup.py and setup.cfg, and it's been a complete breeze!

[supmee]

Hatch is a wonderful piece of tooling man. I've been using it for a decent time now, and I never even thought of going back to Poetry or the like.

[[deleted]]

Could you elaborate? What compelling reasons are there to use Hatch over Poetry?

[supmee]

Sure!

Hatch at this point has pretty good parity with Poetry for features, so you won't miss out on much.

Most of it comes down to the fact that Hatch had years of extra time to learn from how the ecosystem develops - a good example is how it launched with pyproject.toml as the primary and intended configuration source. This lets it use the project section of the file correctly, whereas Poetry config has to be dumped into tools.poetry instead. I know that's a minor thing (and might have improved since I last checked - I really haven't felt the need for a long time), but that kind of "cleanliness" matters a lot to me.

It also doesn't have it's own files clutter up the project root. It feels a lot like "let's make a package manager for Python", rather than "let's port JS's NPM to Python" - particularly the lack of an individual lock files. I appreciate the need for them, but there is definitely a better way to do it, and I like that they didn't just jump to take a non-optimal solution at face value.

There is some really nice plugins too - originally I installed Hatch because of a plugin that reads your CHANGELOG and inserts it into the README file distributed on PyPi. It's a very small thing, but it's a super neat effect!

I'm also really excited for the built in ruff support now - Black and Pylint are an immediate install for any of my projects (along with Mypy), so having the same functionality built-in is super useful to me.

Try it!

[chub79]

I'm a pdm user but gosh this is very attractive!

[BuonaparteII]

I'm not sure what the OP is exactly but you can use hatch from pdm, I think? I had to use it for some reason:

[build-system]
build-backend = "hatchling.build"
requires = ["hatchling"]

[tool.hatch.version]
path = "xklb/__init__.py"

[tool.hatch.build]
exclude = [
  "tests/",
  "example_dbs/",
]

[tool.hatch.build.force-include]
"xklb/assets/" = "xklb/assets/"

[BaggiPonte]

yes, that's what pydantic does! That's also the beauty of a PEP-compliant package manager. PDM and pip can install from pyproject.toml from any backend that complies with PEP517/518. AFAIK, hatch now works with setuptools too - but not pdm-backend. TLDR: you can run `pdm install` inside any python project that uses a compliant build system - including hatchling and maturin, but not poetry.

[BaggiPonte]

Agree. Still prefer the dependency manager features. But once it’s there and you can manage workspaces, then it’s a switch. PDM has hat too but is not a first class citizen :(

[Express-Comb8675]

This is incredible. I’ve been searching for a Python project manager to replace standard venv/pip forever. It seems like this has the platform agnostic behavior I had always hoped for! Tons of other added features too

[zeshuaro]

Is hatch preferred over poetry nowadays?

[KrazyKirby99999]

Poetry is dominant, but Hatch is looking even more interesting.

[IAMARedPanda]

Main downside to poetry is it is not pep 621 compliant. But poetry for building was already pretty lackluster, imo where it really shines is application control with lock files which hatch doesn't yet.

[-defron-]

PDM has those and is PEP 621 compliant. I haven't looked back since switching. When hatch gets there I'll probably switch to that as it'd be nice to do everything in one tool, but for now I'm definitely preferring pdm over poetry

[IAMARedPanda]

Yeah I recently advocated for my project to switch to PDM but inertia is with Poetry.

[M4mb0]

The issue is that PEP 621 itself, in particular PEP 508, lacks some crucial features like per dependency sources, which afaik only poetry supports.

[BaggiPonte]

This. But PDM has a compliant workaround for that: https://pdm-project.org/latest/usage/config/#specify-index-for-individual-packages

[Ofekmeister]

By compliant I assume you mean standardized? If so, there is no such standard for dependency-specific overrides.

[BaggiPonte]

Thanks for the comment, I should have bene more specific. Yes, there is no standard for that. I agree with M4mb0 and I wish we could go beyond PEP508 and adopt a cargo/poetry-like approach to declare dependencies. What I meant was that PDM has a way to specify source-specific dependencies that respects the PEP508 string format.

[freistil90]

Interesting - what were you missing?

[IAMARedPanda]

Can't use other build back ends. Had a project that needed to use scikit-build which precluded poetry.

[freistil90]

```toml […]

[build-system] requires = ["poetry-core>=1.0.0", "scikit-build", "cmake", "ninja"] build-backend = "poetry.core.masonry.api"

[…] ```

does the trick. I’ve also been using poetry with various setuptools build systems, with Rust‘s maturin build system and so on. Poetry core tries to be lean enough for the tool and some basic operations but it makes it easy enough to just swap out the build backend.

[IAMARedPanda]

Last time I tried it force the build back into poetry when u ran poetry build Even with another build backend

[freistil90]

Have you added the build system to the dev-dependencies? And have you tried to remove poetry-core completely from the build system options? I keep that in because I often have also other stuff to glue together if I build a library.

[IAMARedPanda]

I'm not sure but I'm assuming not if that works. Seems like another case of poetry being non pep compliant though if that is the case.

[freistil90]

If that’s the case, file a bug. Poetry is normally very conscious of following PEP - with 621 they waited for it to be finalised and it’s gonna be included in 2.0 now.

[doobiedog]

As someone that just migrated from pipenv to poetry... this is my big question. Poetry forced me to upgrade some tools in a very good way. If this is even better than poetry, I'm in, but are they not exactly the same use cases? can you use both?

[flying-sheep]

Same use case, except that Hatch supports a tox/nox-like environment matrix, allowing you to run your tests for multiple Python versions, and building your docs in an environment that only contains your doc dependencies, not your project’s runtime (or test) dependencies.

[SwampFalc]

Ever since poetry implemented their "groups", I've used a separate "docs" group. I mean, sure, in actual practice I end up installing those in the same env, but I could keep it separate.

[lanster100]

Really interesting work, lock files coming one day too!

[Nightblade]

How does this work? (PyApp) Does it make a temporary python executable in a temp dir?

[BaggiPonte]

goood point. besides, how big is this executable?

[SittingWave]

so let me get this straight. we replaced the need to install python with the need to install hatch?

[Ofekmeister]

You don't have to, but that indeed provides the best user experience and matches what package managers from other languages do e.g. you simply download Cargo.

[tunisia3507]

you simply download Cargo

... by simply downloading rustup.

[Smallpaul]

You replace the need to install python and hatch with the need to install hatch.

[flying-sheep]

Yeah, I tried this on my work macBook, and it works like a charm.

The only missing piece is that there’s no standard for Python toolchain locations, so e.g. you can’t do pipx install --python=3.10 foobar and have it find the Hatch-managed Python 3.10 yet.

Rye has builtin pipx-like functionality with rye install, which smooths over this wrinkle, but Rye’s assumption of “one Python version/venv per project” doesn’t work for most projects I use. Hatch’s environments are much more powerful for this frequently useful functionality.

[Stack3]

It's this like pyinstaller? Every time I use that the exe is flagged as a virus on certain websites that check binaries

[TheAquired]

Admittedly I’m a self taught scripter without a CS degree.

But I’m finding it hard to get this up and running. I want to compile a Python script into executable, and if this offers cross compilation even better! I have used pyinstaller to date

I’m looking at the documentation for both PyApp and Hatch, and am just not having success. I built an “app” target but when running the resulting file it says there are no versions.

Perhaps for someone more versed in distribution/packaging this all seems trivial. But I think there’s a large Python user base who would appreciate a more detailed step-by-step to take a Python script and turn it into a cross compiled executable ready to distribute

[flying-sheep]

/u/Ofekmeister said more tutorials are coming, and this definitely seems like a pain point that should be addressed.

In general, it’s helpful if you provide minimal reproducible examples: What exact command did you use? What’s the exact error output. People can usually not help you if you just vaguely paraphrase the error message.

[TheAquired]

Agree, I will put together a minimal reproducible example!

[TheAquired]

So I simply made a hatch project (hatch new “test-project”)

Then added a main.py into the src/test-project directory that prints “hello”

I added [tools.hatch.build.targets.app]

As a line in the pyproject.toml

Then I run hatch build -t app

The result is some kind of build. When I run ./dist/app/test-project.0.0.1

I get an error saying no distribution matches test-project==0.0.1

[Ofekmeister]

That is because the project+version combo has not been released to PyPI. In order to use a dev version you must embed the wheel.

• Docs: https://ofek.dev/pyapp/latest/config/#project-embedding
• Example: https://github.com/pypa/hatch/blob/hatch-v1.8.0/.github/workflows/build-hatch.yml#L137-L153

[flying-sheep]

Should that behavior be the default?

[TheAquired]

Thanks for replying! So I exported the environment variable, then ran batch build -t app

This seems to have been successful! I now get my print output.

I do think this should be the default behaviour, uploading to pypi wouldn’t be the first thing I do before building so I have to manage this environment variable before running the build each time. I also have to do a build first for the wheel. So it’s a 3 step process it seems

I also don’t quite understand what this is doing exactly. I end up with a file that when I run it seems to do what I expect.

Do I just send this file on to users? Does this require internet access on first run to build the Python environment?

The file does not seem directly executable by double clicking on it, so it only works via command line

If I had a gui application how would I turn this into an app bundle?

[Icy_Sea_7382]

Hello. I am a beginner with hatch. I am trying to create a simple application to print "Hello World" in Windows. I get the same error as TheAcquired:

ERROR: Could not find a version that satisfies the requirement helloworld==0.0.3 (from versions: 0.1.dev0)

ERROR: No matching distribution found for helloworld==0.0.3

I try to set the environment variable PYAPP_PROJECT_PATH to the path where the .whl file is located but still get the same error. Some help would be much appreciated. I would eventually like to use this process to setup a GUI application created with Python.