Use the binary version of psycopg for development

[ulgens]

Replaces psycopg[c] with psycopg[binary] for development.

Relates to #2215

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR updates the Django project to use the binary distribution of psycopg instead of the C extension version, switching from psycopg[c] to psycopg[binary] to simplify the deployment process.

• Changes the psycopg dependency from the C extension variant to the binary distribution
• Removes PostgreSQL development dependencies from the Docker build process
• Simplifies the Docker image by eliminating compilation requirements

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
requirements/common.txt	Updates psycopg dependency from [c] to [binary] variant
Dockerfile	Removes PostgreSQL client tools and development libraries no longer needed for binary distribution

---

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

[pauloxnet]

If finally we're going to use psycopg[binary] check if this depenencies are not needed to the compilation of other dependencies (eg: pillow).

If not, and we don't need any more of these system dependencies to compile python packages, I'll invite you to get rid of the whole section of installing debian packages (also compilers), and removing an leaving only the pip install line.

[ulgens]

gcc and g++ are required for libsass. I looked for an alternative that doesn't require compiling but couldn't find one yet.

[pauloxnet]

Is libsass requiring both gcc and g++ ?
Since you studied it, can we open a PR for the libsass repo to ask a wheel for recent python versions?

[pauloxnet]

Or we can find an alternate package to replace it.

[ulgens]

I'll check this again.

https://github.com/sass/libsass-python says

Provides prebuilt wheel binaries for Linux, Windows, and Mac.

but our build fails with

77.32   × Building wheel for libsass (pyproject.toml) did not run successfully.
...
77.32       error: command 'gcc' failed: No such file or directory

when those dependencies are not installed.

This feels more a like bug, rather than a missing feature in the libsass package.

[pauloxnet]

Thanks for checking.
It seems there isn't a valid python alternative to libsass-python that I know.

[ulgens]

Is there any action needed here?

[tobiasmcnulty]

Thanks for working on this.

As mentioned by @pauloxnet, psql was only recently removed and re-added, and should be restored before this is merged.

Also, it appears we can solve the compilation issue for local dev and still use the [c] variant in the production image.

[tobiasmcnulty]

In reviewing this PR again and the psycopg release notes, I noticed the PR description mentions this PR supersedes #2205, but this PR doesn't bump the version of psycopg to 3.2.10 like #2205. Is there a reason to keep it at 3.2.9?

[ulgens]

Is there a reason to keep it at 3.2.9?

No, I don't intend to keep the version outdated. We can update this PR and close the Dependabot PR, or we can merge this PR, and Dependabot will create another PR to update it. My point was that we don't need both PRs to be merged.

[ulgens]

I updated the dependency version, separated the definitions for dev and prod, reverted the removal of runtime dependencies, and updated the PR title.

The CI failure doesn't seem related to the changes in the PR and I could use help to handle it: https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/actions/runs/17961730284#summary-51086239582

[tobiasmcnulty]

The CI failure doesn't seem related to the changes in the PR and I could use help to handle it:

I reverted the offending commit for now. Hopefully the build will pass if you rebase again.

[ulgens]

I reverted the offending commit for now. Hopefully the build will pass if you rebase again.

Thanks you. CI is passing now. I moved the PR out of draft status.