feat: add handling for Emscripten wheels tags per PEP 783 by hoodmane · Pull Request #804 · pypa/packaging

hoodmane · 2024-05-21T11:49:54Z

These are the changes to packaging specified in PEP 783.

PEP 783 is now accepted per @dstufft
https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-783-emscripten-packaging/86862/104

hoodmane · 2024-06-07T02:11:27Z

@mayeut @henryiii @pradyunsg would appreciate review on this from any of you (and running the workflow).

hoodmane · 2024-06-17T23:23:45Z

Tests and coverage check now pass locally for me.

agriyakhetarpal · 2024-08-03T12:53:15Z

I stumbled into this PR, somehow – I guess the tests are valid for only Python 3.12 and should be skipped for other Python versions, @hoodmane?

agriyakhetarpal · 2025-01-24T06:59:23Z

Now, we also pre-emptively need 2025_0 as we broke/will be breaking the ABI.

juntyr · 2025-02-19T17:46:58Z

+1 - it would be great if packaging installed from PyPi would just work out of the box in Pyodide

agriyakhetarpal · 2025-02-22T10:04:58Z

I guess the only remaining parts here are to generalise the ABI tags, so that emscripten_x_y_zw and pyodide_abcd_e, where $$x, y, z, w, a, b, c, d, e ∈ [0, 9] $$ work, and skip the tests on unsupported Python versions (by probably grabbing the Python version from pyodide config get python_version)?

ofek · 2025-10-28T20:59:30Z

What are the next steps for this?

hoodmane · 2025-10-28T22:21:05Z

This can only be merged once PEP 783 is approved.

ofek · 2025-10-28T22:29:19Z

Indeed, and what's the status of that? I haven't seen any discussion update in months so I don't quite understand the state of the proposal.

hoodmane · 2025-10-28T23:16:35Z

Well I assume you also asked on the discuss thread? You can see the new comments there.
https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-783-emscripten-packaging/86862/64

ofek · 2025-10-28T23:55:36Z

Ah I don't have notifications for that enabled apparently, thanks a lot!

henryiii

The PEP has been accepted, and the little bit of code this adds is in the PEP, so I'll merge this in a day or so unless someone else does it first.

agriyakhetarpal

I feel it's a bit odd to have the Emscripten versions from 2024 (when this PR was opened) frozen in the code, and that we should reflect the newer changes in the ABI at the time of PEP acceptance.

hoodmane · 2026-04-08T13:55:47Z

It doesn't matter what the values are at all, so I think it's fine.

henryiii · 2026-04-08T15:28:41Z

Just in case people look at the tests to implement this (or this gets burned into some LLM), having more realistic values is (slightly) nicer. Since the numbers don't matter, I think it's also fine to have the more realistic values.

They don't need to keep updating, but starting realistic is nice.

henryiii · 2026-04-08T15:56:52Z

@agriyakhetarpal it's saying you are requesting changes? Could you rearview (or point me to any remaining changes?)

agriyakhetarpal

Not sure why that is the case, but all is good here. It showed "Requested changes with read-only permissions" for me, and I'm not a collaborator on this project either, so my review/request-for-changes should have been non-blocking. Approving :)

These are the changes to packaging specified in PEP 783. PEP 783 is now accepted per dstufft https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-783-emscripten-packaging/86862/104

Co-authored-by: Agriya Khetarpal <[email protected]>

ryanking13 · 2026-04-15T04:57:53Z



+def _emscripten_platforms() -> Iterator[str]:
+    pyemscripten_abi_version = sysconfig.get_config_var("PYEMSCRIPTEN_ABI_VERSION")


I guess this should be PYEMSCRIPTEN_PLATFORM_VERSION 😅

Ouch, yes it is that in the PEP. Guess you want a 26.2 with PLATFORM?

Though isn't this really more of a ABI version? PYEMSCRIPTEN_PLATFORM_VERSION seems more like it should be the whole thing.

A 26.1.1 would be fine! And perhaps 26.1 could be yanked, if it's alright (or not).

Though isn't this really more of a ABI version? PYEMSCRIPTEN_PLATFORM_VERSION seems more like it should be the whole thing.

It is, ultimately it's what we call the ABI officially now: https://pyodide.org/en/stable/development/abi.html

Though isn't this really more of a ABI version? PYEMSCRIPTEN_PLATFORM_VERSION seems more like it should be the whole thing.

Well there was a long discussion about whether we should call it ABI or platform, etc. I am not sure which was the better choice, but at least for me platform is clearer than ABI for most of the users I guess.

Packaging does not allow patch releases. I don't really know why, but it's hard-coded into our release system. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

(probably because we aren't semver?)

Could pyodide also set PYEMSCRIPTEN_ABI_VERSION so that 26.1 works without yanking? Don't think we need to yank, not many will be using old packaging and new pyodide together, I'd hope.

I don't think we need yanking here. sysconfig.get_config_var will return None for PYEMSCRIPTEN_ABI_VERSION and the _emscripten_platforms will simply return generic platforms. Old Pyodide will not have the pyemscripten sysconfig var anyways.

Okay, let's leave out yanking here then. Thanks!

hoodmane changed the title ~~Add Pyodide compatibility~~ Add compatibility for Pyodide-tagged wheels May 21, 2024

hoodmane force-pushed the pyodide-compat branch from f57f98a to cf62f7f Compare May 21, 2024 11:58

hoodmane marked this pull request as ready for review June 7, 2024 02:05

brettcannon added enhancement packaging.tags labels Oct 3, 2024

hoodmane mentioned this pull request Jan 24, 2025

New packaging version (can't update) pyodide/pyodide#5366

Closed

2 tasks

agriyakhetarpal mentioned this pull request Feb 19, 2025

Upstream the packaging patch pyodide/pyodide#5440

Closed

juntyr mentioned this pull request Feb 19, 2025

Remove pure Python packages from constraints (and distribution) climet-eu/lab#16

Open

25 tasks

juntyr reviewed Feb 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread tests/test_tags.py Outdated

jezdez reviewed May 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/packaging/tags.py Outdated

hoodmane changed the title ~~Add compatibility for Pyodide-tagged wheels~~ Add compatibility for PyEmscripten-tagged wheels Apr 6, 2026

hoodmane changed the title ~~Add compatibility for PyEmscripten-tagged wheels~~ PEP 783: Add handling for Emscripten wheels tags Apr 6, 2026

hoodmane changed the title ~~PEP 783: Add handling for Emscripten wheels tags~~ Add handling for Emscripten wheels tags per PEP 783 Apr 6, 2026

hoodmane force-pushed the pyodide-compat branch 3 times, most recently from dffeaa4 to 3585143 Compare April 7, 2026 04:20

henryiii approved these changes Apr 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

henryiii mentioned this pull request Apr 7, 2026

26.1 release plans #1149

Closed

agriyakhetarpal suggested changes Apr 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

agriyakhetarpal approved these changes Apr 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

hoodmane and others added 2 commits April 8, 2026 13:09

Add handling for Emscripten wheels tags per PEP 783

f6e95f3

These are the changes to packaging specified in PEP 783. PEP 783 is now accepted per dstufft https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-783-emscripten-packaging/86862/104

Apply suggestions from code review

b540c5a

Co-authored-by: Agriya Khetarpal <[email protected]>

henryiii force-pushed the pyodide-compat branch from fd39352 to b540c5a Compare April 8, 2026 17:09

henryiii merged commit 2c6c7df into pypa:main Apr 8, 2026
57 checks passed

henryiii changed the title ~~Add handling for Emscripten wheels tags per PEP 783~~ feat: add handling for Emscripten wheels tags per PEP 783 Apr 8, 2026

henryiii mentioned this pull request Apr 13, 2026

docs: update changelog for 26.1 #1156

Merged

ryanking13 reviewed Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

ryanking13 mentioned this pull request Apr 15, 2026

Fix incorrect sysconfig var name for pyemscripten #1160

Merged



		def _emscripten_platforms() -> Iterator[str]:
		pyemscripten_abi_version = sysconfig.get_config_var("PYEMSCRIPTEN_ABI_VERSION")

Conversation

hoodmane commented May 21, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

hoodmane commented Jun 7, 2024

Uh oh!

hoodmane commented Jun 17, 2024

Uh oh!

agriyakhetarpal commented Aug 3, 2024

Uh oh!

agriyakhetarpal commented Jan 24, 2025

Uh oh!

juntyr commented Feb 19, 2025

Uh oh!

agriyakhetarpal commented Feb 22, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ofek commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

hoodmane commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

ofek commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

hoodmane commented Oct 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ofek commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

henryiii left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

agriyakhetarpal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

hoodmane commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

henryiii commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

henryiii commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

agriyakhetarpal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

agriyakhetarpal Apr 15, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

henryiii Apr 15, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

hoodmane commented May 21, 2024 •

edited

Loading

hoodmane commented Oct 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading

agriyakhetarpal Apr 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading

henryiii Apr 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading