[Distutils] Request for comment: Proposal to change behaviour of pip install

[Pradyun Gedam]

On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 at 12:21 Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Pradyun Gedam <pradyunsg at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello List!
>>
>> I feel it’s fine to hold back the other changes for later but the
>> upgrade-strategy change should get shipped out to the world as quickly as
>> possible. Even how the change is exposed the user can also be discussed
>> later.
>>
> What do you mean by "ship" if you say the behavior can still be changed
> later?
>

Sorry for the confusion and a useless-mail! Allow me to re-phrase that
statement...

I think it's fine if we hold back the changes to install-as-upstall and
--target for later. The
upgrade-strategy change should get released to the world as quickly as
possible. If no one has any outstanding issues with switching over to
non-eager upgrades by default, may we start a discussing on how the change
is to be exposed the user?


>
>> I request the list members to focus on *only* the change of the default
>> upgrade strategy to be non-eager.
>>
>> Does anyone have any concerns regarding the change of the default upgrade
>> strategy to be non-eager? If not, let’s get *just* that shipped out as
>> soon as possible.
>>
> The concerns were always with how to change it
>

There were security-related concerns raised by Robert which were addressed
[1] by Donald.


> one of:
> (1) add "pip upgrade"
> (2) change behavior of "pip install --upgrade"
> (3) change behavior of "pip install"
>
> Your sentence above suggests you're asking for agreement on (2), but I
> think you want agreement on (3) right? At least that was the conclusion of
> your PEP-style writeup.
>
>
As it stands, we currently have (3) implemented (as proposed in that
write-up) since that was what was extensively discussed and decided over at
Github. If no one has issues with it, let's go ahead with it. If there is
anyone has issues, I'm fine with going (2) as well. I do not like (1) due
to the weird model it creates providing 2 ways to do what most people would
see as one thing.

Basically, If we were voting, -1 for (1), +0.5 for (2), +1 for (3).

Personally I don't have a preference anymore, as long as a choice is made
> so we don't remain stuck where we are now.
>
> Ralf
>

[1] There's probably a better word for this than "addressed".

 --

Pradyun Gedam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20160627/cef765ca/attachment-0001.html>