[Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement? (original) (raw)
Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu
Fri Sep 27 20:50:22 CEST 2013
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 9/27/2013 10:26 AM, Paul Moore wrote: [snip longish post] I want to summarize the main points of what I believe Paul said and strongly agree with them.
For this issue, and especially for backporting to 2.7/3.3, we should consider Windows, Mac, and *nix distributions as separate cases.
For Windows users, it would be really good if the PSF installer for the next releases of all versions at least optionally resulted in the installation of the most recent pip possible.
I add: just how that is accomplished is not the users concern, except possibly for using the net to check for a later version of pip. Also, we can encourage but not command Enthought and ActiveState to do the same suite in their plus distributions.
- For 2.7/3.3, Windows users have no need to run _ensurepip after installation.
I add: for 2.7/3.3, there is consequently no need for _ensurepip to be in /Lib after installation, even if temporarily added*. If it is not there, there is no change the the stdlib, and hence no violation of the 'no new features' policy. The optional installation of pip is not a change to Python itself.
- Where the 2.7/3.3 installers merely bundle pip or use the 3.4 procedure with an extra delete step strikes me as an implementation detail best decided by the installer maker (Martin).
-- Terry Jan Reedy
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]