Understand --editable=. also in requirements.txt

[amotl]

Hi. Thanks a stack for conceiving uv. It is a true game changer in so many scenarios. 💯

Summary

requirements.txt files can reference dependencies of the local package at hand inside the working tree by using different option syntax like -e ., --editable ., or --editable=., iirc.

We are using the latter variant throughout our projects ¹, but it trips uv:

$ uv pip install -r docs/requirements.txt
error: Couldn't parse requirement in `docs/requirements.txt` at position 122
  Caused by: Expected package name starting with an alphanumeric character, found `=`
=.
^

Maybe this little report can help to make uv more universal in edge case situations like ours. It is certainly not a blocking issue for us, as we can easily update the offending line to use -e . instead of --editable=..

References

• uv pip install -r requirements.txt Fails to Parse Requirements #10417
• Support . for paths #1589
• Difference with pip on local non-editable installs #1827
• . only works with --editable #1499

Platform

Darwin 22.6.0 x86_64

Version

uv 0.5.23 (Homebrew 2025-01-23)

Python version

Python 3.13.1

Footnotes

1. Example: https://github.com/crate/crate-docs-theme/blob/0.37.2/docs/requirements.txt ↩

[zanieb]

Thanks for the clear report. I'm of the opinion that we shouldn't support this, but am curious what others think.

[charliermarsh]

I'm sort of fine with it, since it seems pretty trivial.

[charliermarsh]

Oh interesting, we already support this for most values (but not --editable), that seems like an oversight.

[amotl]

That was fast. Thank you for improving per GH-10954 so quickly.