# Package manager: what are "explicit requirements"?

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/package-manager-what-are-explicit-requirements/18616
**Category:** General Usage
**Tags:** pkg
**Created:** [December 13, 2018, 12:16am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/package-manager-what-are-explicit-requirements/18616 "2018-12-13T00:16:40Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 19

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![tkf](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/tkf/32/17635_2.png) [@tkf](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/tkf)
#### Post date: [April 24, 2019, 7:48am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/package-manager-what-are-explicit-requirements/18616/19 "2019-04-24T07:48:10Z")

</div>

I think you misunderstand my point. The resolver is a different issue and I’m not asking for a “user-space” workaround.

> [@kristoffer.carlsson](#):
>
> the upper bounds placed by the METADATA converter

If I understand correctly, this is a wrong implementation of [the specification of `REQUIRE` file](https://docs.julialang.org/en/v0.6/manual/packages/#Requirements-Specification-1). I understand that [it didn’t matter before the full transition to `General`](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/dependency-problem-with-fillarrays/23238/19) but I think the current setup of `General` ignores what was specified in `REQUIRE` files.

Of course, I don’t know much about packaging system implementation so I may be missing some very obvious. I hope I’m not making unnecessary noise.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/package-manager-what-are-explicit-requirements/18616)._