On Jun 06, 2014, at 02:39 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>In summary, I propose the following binary packages:
>
>python3-virtualenv:
>NEW package
>contains the Python 3 importable virtualenv module.
>
>python-virtualenv:
>contains the Python 2 importable virtualenv module.
>(needed only
I have virtualenv working now, so I want to readdress the *real* question I
had.
On May 29, 2014, at 07:54 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>This means however that I need to rejigger the binary packages in the
>python-virtualenv source package. Right now, python-virtualenv contains both
>the modules and
On Jun 04, 2014, at 11:07 PM, Zygmunt Krynicki wrote:
>Barry, would it be sensible to default to python2 (so keep existing outside
>behaviour unchanged) and then only after a grace period and enough
>announcements make python3 the default? To me doing it right now seems like
>breaking lots of scri
On Jun 04, 2014, at 10:20 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>Won't python 3 users be using python3 -m venv?
Or `pyvenv-3` once I get that working. ;)
-Barry
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:51 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jun 02, 2014, at 04:43 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> >Sounds reasonable to me, the only “downside” is that virutalenv will
> default
> >to Python 3, which is probably not what most people want (however they
> >can do virtualenv -p python2).
On Jun 4, 2014, at 4:20 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Barry (2014.06.02_22:51:24_+0200)
>>> Sounds reasonable to me, the only “downside” is that virutalenv will default
>>> to Python 3, which is probably not what most people want (however they
>>> can do virtualenv -p python2).
>>
>> But it's
Hi Barry (2014.06.02_22:51:24_+0200)
> >Sounds reasonable to me, the only “downside” is that virutalenv will default
> >to Python 3, which is probably not what most people want (however they
> >can do virtualenv -p python2).
>
> But it's what most people *should* want .
Won't python 3 users be us
* Barry Warsaw [2014-06-02 16:51:24 -0400]:
> On Jun 02, 2014, at 04:43 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> >Sounds reasonable to me, the only “downside” is that virutalenv will default
> >to Python 3, which is probably not what most people want (however they
> >can do virtualenv -p python2).
>
> But
On Jun 02, 2014, at 04:43 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>Sounds reasonable to me, the only “downside” is that virutalenv will default
>to Python 3, which is probably not what most people want (however they
>can do virtualenv -p python2).
But it's what most people *should* want .
Seriously though, I w
On Jun 2, 2014, at 4:35 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On May 30, 2014, at 11:47 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
>> So let's say pbundler is the only thing other than tox that does this.
>
> Well, now pbundler has been removed from the archive, so I don't care about
> it anymore. ;) I can't see any reas
On May 30, 2014, at 11:47 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>So let's say pbundler is the only thing other than tox that does this.
Well, now pbundler has been removed from the archive, so I don't care about
it anymore. ;) I can't see any reason not to make virtualenv a Python 3
application and Python 3-o
Returning to the original question...
On May 29, 2014, at 08:30 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>Does anything other than tox depend on virtualenv?
The real question is whether any Python 2 packages in the archive try to
import virtualenv, rather than say shell out to /usr/bin/virtualenv. AFAICT,
only
[Scott Kitterman, 2014-05-30]
> I'd rather remove the wheels we have and give up on ensurepip than
> start down this slippery slope.
>
> Wheels are an ugly solution for us to work around upstream doing
> things that can most charitably be described as fixing problems we
> don't have. No more.
On May 29, 2014, at 9:18 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Barry Warsaw writes:
>
>> On May 29, 2014, at 08:15 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>
>>> I'd rather [Debian] remove the wheels we have and give up on
>>> ensurepip than start down this slippery slope.
>>
>> That means we give up on pyvenv, and gi
Barry Warsaw writes:
> On May 29, 2014, at 08:15 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> >I'd rather [Debian] remove the wheels we have and give up on
> >ensurepip than start down this slippery slope.
>
> That means we give up on pyvenv, and given that virtualenv will
> eventually be a wrapper around pyve
On May 29, 2014, at 08:59 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>I was referring to wheels. It's my understanding that they are primarily for
>platforms without package management.
We use them in the pyvenv solution (and soon in the virtualenv
de-policy-violating solution) because they're the best way (IMHO
On May 29, 2014 8:27:07 PM EDT, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
>On May 29, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Scott Kitterman
>wrote:
>
>> On May 29, 2014 7:54:53 PM EDT, Barry Warsaw
>wrote:
>>> I'm looking again at updating tox to the latest upstream 1.7.1.
>Along
>>> the
>>> way, I'd like to make /usr/bin/tox a Pyth
On May 29, 2014, at 08:30 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>Does anything other than tox depend on virtualenv? Unless something python
>2.x depends on virtualenv the only real benefit to having virtualenv
>installed in both 2.x and 3.x is what the default interpreter is whenever you
>create a virtual envi
On May 29, 2014, at 08:15 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>I'd rather remove the wheels we have and give up on ensurepip than start down
>this slippery slope.
That means we give up on pyvenv, and given that virtualenv will eventually be
a wrapper around pyvenv, that means we give up on virtual environ
On May 29, 2014, at 7:54 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I'm looking again at updating tox to the latest upstream 1.7.1. Along the
> way, I'd like to make /usr/bin/tox a Python 3 script.
>
> This requires that virtualenv be importable, e.g. `$python -m virtualenv`. It
> is today in Python 2 since /
On May 29, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On May 29, 2014 7:54:53 PM EDT, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> I'm looking again at updating tox to the latest upstream 1.7.1. Along
>> the
>> way, I'd like to make /usr/bin/tox a Python 3 script.
>>
>> This requires that virtualenv be importable,
On May 29, 2014 7:54:53 PM EDT, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>I'm looking again at updating tox to the latest upstream 1.7.1. Along
>the
>way, I'd like to make /usr/bin/tox a Python 3 script.
>
>This requires that virtualenv be importable, e.g. `$python -m
>virtualenv`. It
>is today in Python 2 since /us
I'm looking again at updating tox to the latest upstream 1.7.1. Along the
way, I'd like to make /usr/bin/tox a Python 3 script.
This requires that virtualenv be importable, e.g. `$python -m virtualenv`. It
is today in Python 2 since /usr/bin/virtualenv is a Python 2 script and we
only build it f
23 matches
Mail list logo
