Open Stack

> On Apr 15, 2015, at 5:06 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> 
> Joe Gordon wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Chris Dent <chdent at redhat.com
>> <mailto:chdent at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>    On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Joe Gordon wrote:
>>            deploy requirements - requirements.txt - which are meant to
>>            be *local
>>            to a deployment*, and are commonly expected to specify very
>>            narrow (or
>>            even exact fit) versions.
>> 
>>        Link to where this is documented? If this isn't written down
>>        anywhere, then
>>        that should be a pre-requisite to this conversation. Get upstream to
>>        document this.
>> 
>>    I don't know where it is documented but this was the common wisdom I
>>    knew from the Python community since long before coming to the
>>    OpenStack community. To me, seeing a requirements.txt in a repo that
>>    represents a class of an app or library (rather than an instance of
>>    a deployment) was quite a surprise.
>> 
>>    (This doesn't have that much bearing on the practical aspects of
>>    this conversation, just wanted to add some anecdata that the precedent
>>    described above is not weird or alien in any way.)
>> 
>> https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/requirements.html
>> 
>> Turns out it was easier then I thought to find the documentation for this.
> 
> And the doc is indeed pretty clear. I assumed "requirements.txt" would
> describe... well... requirements. But like Robert said they are meant to
> describe specific deployments (should really be have been named
> deployment.txt, or at least dependencies.txt).
> 

The name is just a convention. They can be named anything as far as pip is concerned.