[Distutils] flip the pip dependencies (was Current status of PEP 439)

[Marcus Smith]

yea, all those comebacks make sense to me.   we should try the bundle and
see if it works.

we already do some fancy footwork when working with setup.py
https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/req.py#L602
https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/req.py#L687
https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/req.py#L269
https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/wheel.py#L291

I guess we'd be doing some additional override work in sys.modules.

Marcus

On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Donald Stufft <donald at stufft.io> wrote:

>
> On Jul 13, 2013, at 3:35 PM, Marcus Smith <qwcode at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> As you're aware I think it makes the most sense to just bundle setuptools
>> wholesale. This makes it impossible to "break" pip by something going wrong
>> in setuptools causing it to be uninstalled and means that for users who are
>> only doing installs, they don't need setuptools installed just pip.
>>
>
> I'm a fan of bundling too (if it works), but the "dynamic install of
> setuptools" idea also offers what you mention, although admittedly with
> more fragility.   If a user uninstalled setuptools, it would be installed
> again when needed,  and users only need pip to get started, and don't have
> to think about the setuptools dependency themselves.
>
> The drawbacks of bundling setuptools:
> 1) maybe some weird bug/side-effect shows up after we do it (ok, maybe
> that's FUD)
> 2) users can't upgrade themselves (for use in pip)
> 3) more tedium in our release process.
> 4) feels odd to bundle it knowing we'd likely drop it later, if we do the
> MEBs thing.
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> 1) That's kinda FUD-y yea ;) But I'd say it's equally as likely to have
> weird bugs/side effects due to people using different combinations of
> pip/setuptools with pip than we've tested.
>
> 2) This much is true, the question then becomes how important is that? If
> there's a major regression in setuptools that needs fixed I'd think we'd
> release an updated pip. If there's new functionality I would guess we'd
> need to expose that in pip anyways.
>
> 3) I think this isn't as big of a deal as it sounds. Especially given we
> can write tooling to make it simpler :)
>
> 4) Even if MEBs were here *right now* we'd still have nearly 150k source
> dists that required setuptools. So either in the MEB system we'd be
> grabbing setuptools *a lot* or we could just bundle it to provide a better
> UX for people using the large corpus of existing software. I think it will
> be a long time once the MEBs exist before they gain enough traction that
> even the bulk of installs are using that system. MEBs depend on sdist 2.0
> which hasn't even been started yet ;)
>
>
> -----------------
> Donald Stufft
> PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372
> DCFA
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20130713/9e6991d3/attachment-0001.html>