Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Multiple outputs for e.g. webpdf, pandoc #46

Closed
bollwyvl opened this issue Oct 10, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #47
Closed

Multiple outputs for e.g. webpdf, pandoc #46

bollwyvl opened this issue Oct 10, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #47

Comments

@bollwyvl
Copy link
Contributor

Hey folks!

Over on conda-forge/staged-recipes#12516 (comment) we've been chatting about the tradeoffs of offering a jupyter-book-webpdf, which would be somewhat simpler if there was an nbconvert-webpdf which already carried the pyppeteer pin, beyond what run_constrained would do.

However we solve it over there, we could take the opportunity to offer, a la matplotlib[-base]

  • nbconvert-core (which could be noarch: python) that still carried all the run_constrained pieces, but was lighter-weight and -featured (pandoc should be an optional, not required, dependency #24)
  • nbconvert that actually required pandoc, and therefore could not be noarch: python, for now
  • nbconvert-webpdf that acutally required pyppeteer, and could actually also be noarch: python

It would take a while (or maybe a migration) to get everything that didn't specifically need the pandoc capability to use -core, but eventually, maybe, (more) people could be happy(er).

I'm happy to work up a PR if people think this is a good idea.

@ocefpaf
Copy link
Member

ocefpaf commented Oct 10, 2020

I don't have strong opinions about this but I'd love to get the input from the upstream devs of nbconvert. (I'm guessing you are one of them, right?)

Can you bring this up with them and get their opinion on this?

@bollwyvl
Copy link
Contributor Author

From the nbconvert issue, we've got one 👍 from the most active maintainer... we can let it cook for a while, but i can knock together a wip PR...

@ocefpaf
Copy link
Member

ocefpaf commented Oct 10, 2020

If the most active maintainer is happy, go for it!

@bollwyvl
Copy link
Contributor Author

Welp, here we go: #47

@minrk minrk closed this as completed in #47 Mar 29, 2022
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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants