253 appears to have resulted in a useful fix for some more intricate dependency name resolution issues, however I worry about the efficacy of relying entirely on cf-graph.
I think there might be some more simple name confusion issues. For instance pytorch-ignite is simply ignite from the pytorch channel, but pytorch-ignite on pip. in cf-graph, both names are pytorch ignite.
Also, useful supplementary libraries published on private channels don't have any listing. deep graph library (conda dgl-cuda11.6 and pip cgl-cu116) doesn't appear anywhere on the mapping.
Perhaps users could specify in pyproject.toml explicit name maps names for conda-lock to use?
253 appears to have resulted in a useful fix for some more intricate dependency name resolution issues, however I worry about the efficacy of relying entirely on cf-graph.
I think there might be some more simple name confusion issues. For instance pytorch-ignite is simply ignite from the pytorch channel, but pytorch-ignite on pip. in cf-graph, both names are pytorch ignite.
Also, useful supplementary libraries published on private channels don't have any listing. deep graph library (conda dgl-cuda11.6 and pip cgl-cu116) doesn't appear anywhere on the mapping.
Perhaps users could specify in pyproject.toml explicit name maps names for conda-lock to use?