\o/
> On Apr 4, 2014, at 7:12 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
>> On Mar 19, 2014, at 05:40 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>
>> The current situation in the Python 3.4 package is suboptimal because:
>>
>> % pyvenv-3.4 /tmp/zz
>> Error: Command '['/tmp/zz/bin/python3.4', '-Im', 'ensurepip', '--upgrade',
>>
On Mar 19, 2014, at 05:40 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>The current situation in the Python 3.4 package is suboptimal because:
>
>% pyvenv-3.4 /tmp/zz
>Error: Command '['/tmp/zz/bin/python3.4', '-Im', 'ensurepip', '--upgrade',
>'--default-pip']' returned non-zero exit status 1
Please see issue #73270
Hello,
- Original Message -
> From: "Brian Sutherland"
> To: debian-python@lists.debian.org
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 5:13:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Python 3.4 and ensurepip (rehashed, long)
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 01:23:53PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wr
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 01:23:53PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Barry Warsaw, 2014-03-19]
> > TL;DR: Let's re-enable the ensurepip module in Python 3.4, and possibly
> >address some usability issues. We should descend en masse on Montreal
> > and
> >stage a revolt at Pycon. :)
>
> IM
On Mar 26, 2014, at 10:42 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>> But also, -I should imply this new option for full isolation.
>
>Not sure about this, I don’t think I saw the original discussion but it looks
>like -I is to prevent the user from injecting malicious code (so it removes
>env vars, the user site
[Barry Warsaw, 2014-03-26]
> I do think this would require a --dont-blame-us switch analogous to
> -s/$PYTHONNOUSERSITE. We'd want to recommend adding that switch to shebang
> lines for system services and scripts, much like we already do with -Es. For
> complete isolation, -I should imply this n
On Mar 26, 2014, at 04:12 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
>This really starts to look like we should all join one mailing list and
>discuss this in one thread :) What about the pypa ML? I guess joining one
>more ML is worth this...
Yep, I think pypa is probably the right mailing list to take this to.
On Mar 26, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mar 26, 2014, at 09:24 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
>> In my half formed idea in my head the way it’d work is there’d be a
>> vendor-packages directory where downstream can install things to, and a flag
>> to the interpreter to remove the typ
On Mar 26, 2014, at 09:24 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>In my half formed idea in my head the way it’d work is there’d be a
>vendor-packages directory where downstream can install things to, and a flag
>to the interpreter to remove the typical site-packages. So then you’d get
>something like:
>
>p
On Mar 26, 2014, at 12:15 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>If I've install a package and it's upgraded (this is for the system, not for
>any kind of virtualized/isolated environment), I would find it quite
>surprising and unfortunate that it upgraded itself from an external source.
IMO, if you've apt-
On Mar 26, 2014, at 02:16 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>then --dont-blame-us has to mean removing /usr/local from sys.path
Right.
-Barry
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https:
On Mar 26, 2014, at 9:16 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Donald Stufft, 2014-03-26]
>> On Mar 26, 2014, at 9:12 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>>> [Barry Warsaw, 2014-03-25]
One of the things I'd like to see, in addition to supporting
platform-specified system-level installation directories
[Donald Stufft, 2014-03-26]
> On Mar 26, 2014, at 9:12 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> > [Barry Warsaw, 2014-03-25]
> >> One of the things I'd like to see, in addition to supporting
> >> platform-specified system-level installation directories
> >> (i.e. /usr/local/lib/pythonX.Y/dist-packages on Debi
On Mar 26, 2014, at 9:12 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Barry Warsaw, 2014-03-25]
>> One of the things I'd like to see, in addition to supporting
>> platform-specified system-level installation directories
>> (i.e. /usr/local/lib/pythonX.Y/dist-packages on Debian), is an upstream
>> switch
>> to
[Barry Warsaw, 2014-03-25]
> One of the things I'd like to see, in addition to supporting
> platform-specified system-level installation directories
> (i.e. /usr/local/lib/pythonX.Y/dist-packages on Debian), is an upstream switch
> to tell Python to ignore this directory, mirroring e.g. -s. That w
[Robert Collins, 2014-03-26]
> On 26 March 2014 17:15, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 15:29:06 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> >> On Mar 25, 2014, at 03:19 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> >> >I assume once someone has installed pip with apt-get they'd still be able
> >> >to run pip install
- Original Message -
> On Mar 21, 2014, at 04:30 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> I'd still like something like that. On Debian, Python adds a /usr/local
> directory to sys.path, but it's not /usr/local/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages,
> it's .../dist-packages for reasons we've long hashed out and
On 26 March 2014 17:15, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 15:29:06 Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> On Mar 25, 2014, at 03:19 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>> >I assume once someone has installed pip with apt-get they'd still be able
>> >to run pip install --upgrade pip if they wanted too?
>>
>
On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 15:29:06 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mar 25, 2014, at 03:19 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> >I assume once someone has installed pip with apt-get they’d still be able
> >to run pip install —upgrade pip if they wanted too?
>
> I would think they should be able to do that.
If I'v
On Mar 25, 2014, at 03:19 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>I assume once someone has installed pip with apt-get they’d still be able
>to run pip install —upgrade pip if they wanted too?
I would think they should be able to do that.
-Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mar 25, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2014, at 02:28 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
>> - whether to use python3-pip or a freshly downloaded pip. When using
>> pip to install for the system python3, maybe try to use the shipped
>> python3-pip. I have no opinion if anot
On Mar 25, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2014, at 04:30 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
>
>> I'm on python-dev but not pypa-dev. But if you want to take the discussion
>> there, I guess I'm ok with following yet another mailing list.
>
> Gmane makes life on a zillion mailing li
On Mar 21, 2014, at 02:28 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> - whether to use python3-pip or a freshly downloaded pip. When using
>pip to install for the system python3, maybe try to use the shipped
>python3-pip. I have no opinion if another pip is downloaded and
>installed into for enviro
On Mar 21, 2014, at 02:43 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>Also yea pip in the system Python currently kind of sucks. I want to make this
>better eventually! I just don't know how yet or have the cycles to spend
>investigating it.
One of the things I'd like to see, in addition to supporting
platform-spe
On Mar 21, 2014, at 04:30 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
>I'm on python-dev but not pypa-dev. But if you want to take the discussion
>there, I guess I'm ok with following yet another mailing list.
Gmane makes life on a zillion mailing lists so much more manageable. ;)
>Yep, they do that. That's actu
On Mar 21, 2014, at 3:39 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Mar 21, 2014, at 3:24 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 17:40:51 Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>> Signed by ba...@warsaw.us. Show Details
>>> TL;DR: Let's re-enable the ensurepip module in Python 3.4, and possibly
>>>
On Mar 21, 2014, at 3:24 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 17:40:51 Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> Signed by ba...@warsaw.us. Show Details
>> TL;DR: Let's re-enable the ensurepip module in Python 3.4, and possibly
>> address some usability issues. We should descend en masse
On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 17:40:51 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Signed by ba...@warsaw.us.Show Details
> TL;DR: Let's re-enable the ensurepip module in Python 3.4, and possibly
>address some usability issues. We should descend en masse on Montreal
> and stage a revolt at Pycon. :)
>
> Python
Hey there,
Pip/virtualenv maintainer here and also one of the authors of PEP453. I had
someone complaining to me that Python 3.4’s venv module was broken today and
through investigating that I found this discussion. I'm signed onto the list
now :)
I think I wrote most of those recommendations, I'
Am 21.03.2014 13:23, schrieb Piotr Ożarowski:
[Barry Warsaw, 2014-03-19]
TL;DR: Let's re-enable the ensurepip module in Python 3.4, and possibly
address some usability issues. We should descend en masse on Montreal and
stage a revolt at Pycon. :)
IMO our ensurepip.py should look simil
[Barry Warsaw, 2014-03-19]
> TL;DR: Let's re-enable the ensurepip module in Python 3.4, and possibly
>address some usability issues. We should descend en masse on Montreal and
>stage a revolt at Pycon. :)
IMO our ensurepip.py should look similar to this:
| try:
| from pip import *
|
- Original Message -
> Thanks for following up here, and welcome to the list! I lurk on the Fedora
> list via Gmane, but I don't think I have posting privileges there.
> Responding
> a bit out of order.
Thanks!
> On Mar 20, 2014, at 04:53 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
>
> >I'll be glad to
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I: Should we follow Fedora?
>
> Fedora is discussing some of these issues too[6]. Looks like one of their
> devs created an rpm->wheel conversion script so that if you pip install a
> package from the archive, it'll get the rpm, convert it to
Thanks for following up here, and welcome to the list! I lurk on the Fedora
list via Gmane, but I don't think I have posting privileges there. Responding
a bit out of order.
On Mar 20, 2014, at 04:53 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
>I'll be glad to discuss this/answer all questions that might arise
Le 20/03/14 09:53, Bohuslav Kabrda a écrit :
I'll be glad to discuss this/answer all questions that might arise
about our approach. I'd really love to see it as a general
cross-distro approach.
Thanks for your post
As Mageia packager, I'm interested to join this kind of discussion.
I didn't h
- Original Message -
> TL;DR: Let's re-enable the ensurepip module in Python 3.4, and possibly
>address some usability issues. We should descend en masse on Montreal and
>stage a revolt at Pycon. :)
>
> Python 3.4 has an `ensurepip` module[1] which implements the specification in
TL;DR: Let's re-enable the ensurepip module in Python 3.4, and possibly
address some usability issues. We should descend en masse on Montreal and
stage a revolt at Pycon. :)
Python 3.4 has an `ensurepip` module[1] which implements the specification in
PEP 453 regarding the explicit bootstra
37 matches
Mail list logo
