Skip to content

[Doc]: Be more explicit about development dependencies #23831

Closed

Description

@greglucas

Documentation Link

https://matplotlib.org/devdocs/devel/dependencies.html#dependencies-for-testing-matplotlib

Problem

It is somewhat unclear what explicit dependencies are needed for running certain classes of tests and why certain tests are skipped.

Suggested improvement

Inkscape "to render SVG files" -> "for SVG image tests". Perhaps turning the prose text after the dependency into a column next to the dependency. Another thought is to switch the order and put the reason for the dependency first and then list all of the requirements after that.

To run SVG image tests | Inkscape
To run PDF image tests | ghostscript

Activity

  1. story645 commented on Sep 8, 2022

    @story645
    Member

    A thing I'd like is maybe moving our dependency sections https://matplotlib.org/devdocs/devel/dependencies.html into a table to make it more clear which are optional for what things.

    dependency runtime testing docs notes
    python r r r
    inkscape o o o rendering and testing svgs
  2. github-actions commented on Dec 22, 2025

    @github-actions

    This issue has been marked "inactive" because it has been 365 days since the last comment. If this issue is still present in recent Matplotlib releases, or the feature request is still wanted, please leave a comment and this label will be removed. If there are no updates in another 30 days, this issue will be automatically closed, but you are free to re-open or create a new issue if needed. We value issue reports, and this procedure is meant to help us resurface and prioritize issues that have not been addressed yet, not make them disappear. Thanks for your help!

  3. melissawm commented on Jan 21, 2026

    @melissawm
    Member

    Do we still want to do this? I see the test (and the other) dependencies are now connected to the relevant requirements, so it looks like this could be closed.

  4. timhoffm commented on Jan 21, 2026

    @timhoffm
    Member

    The current state is good enough for me. Fine with closing.

  5. story645 commented on Jan 21, 2026

    @story645
    Member

    Still want the table but can't figure out a clean way of doing it such that info isn't repeated & there's too much info to get rid of the standalone sections. So I'm gonna close, @greglucas feel free to reopen if info is still missing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions