Xavier, how is connecting and installing different from a windows popup "this software requires changes to your firewall settings" or "requires elevated privileges" which already happens. I am all for a two-step process, but I think it should be more user friendly, and it can be done as a Python command from inside the script.

If I send you a small script, it should be treated in the same way as if I send you a program - an installer - not as a code that you should incorporate into your already existing code base.

‪On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:28 AM ‫אלעזר‬‎ <elazarg@gmail.com> wrote:‬
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:20 AM Stephen J. Turnbull <turnbull.stephen.fw@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
אלעזר writes:

 > Another use case, though I admit not the top priority of anyone here, is
 > that of assignment checkers. In most courses I took at the university, the
 > person who checks the assignments says something like "you are allowed to
 > use only this this and this libraries", in order not to mess with unknown
 > dependencies from tens of students (I am talking about advanced courses,
 > where the method I use to solve the problem is unimportant or only requires
 > explanation). With this statement they can simply state "you can import
 > pip".

In other words, you're advocating a feature that allows script writers
to download, install, and execute arbitrary, unsandboxed code on any
machine where the script is run.  That sounds ... *scary*, when put
that way.  Remember, you're advocating this on behalf of people who by assumption are infants years below the age of consent.

Let me understand. Your argument is "installing pip modules is unsafe, and therefore we should make it less usable, where the appropriate amount of (un)usability is running cmd and then `pip install unsafe`" ?