[Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

[Ralf Gommers]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Warren Weckesser <
>>>> warren.weckesser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently it is not well known that if you have a Python project
>>>>>> source tree (e.g., a numpy checkout), then the correct way to install
>>>>>> it is NOT to type
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   python setup.py install   # bad and broken!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but rather to type
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   pip install .
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, I don't see any mention of this in the numpy docs, but I do see
>>>>> a lot of instructions involving `setup.py build` and `setup.py install`.
>>>>> See, for example, INSTALL.txt.  Also see
>>>>>
>>>>> http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/user/install.html#building-from-source
>>>>> So I guess it is not surprising that it is not well known.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, install docs are always hopelessly outdated. And we have too
>>>> many of them. There's duplicate info in INSTALL.txt and
>>>> http://scipy.org/scipylib/building/index.html for example. We should
>>>> probably just empty out INSTALL.txt and simply put a link in it to the html
>>>> docs.
>>>>
>>>> I've created an issue with a long todo list and a bunch of links:
>>>> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/6599. Feel free to add stuff. Or
>>>> to go fix something:)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, and: looking at this thread there haven't been serious unanswered
>>> concerns (at least in my perception), so without more discussion I'd
>>> interpret the current status as "go ahead".
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, after some more testing I'm going to have to bring up a few concerns
>> myself:
>>
>> 1. ``pip install .`` still has a clear bug; it starts by copying
>> everything (including .git/ !) to a tempdir with shutil, which is very
>> slow. And the fix for that will go via ``setup.py sdist``, which is still
>> slow.
>>
>> 2. ``pip install .`` silences build output, which may make sense for some
>> usecases, but for numpy it just sits there for minutes with no output after
>> printing "Running setup.py install for numpy". Users will think it hangs
>> and Ctrl-C it. https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/2732
>>
>> 3. ``pip install .`` refuses to upgrade an already installed development
>> version. For released versions that makes sense, but if I'm in a git tree
>> then I don't want it to refuse because 1.11.0.dev0+githash1 compares equal
>> to 1.11.0.dev0+githash2. Especially after waiting a few minutes, see (1).
>>
>>
>> I've sent a (incomplete) fix for the shutil thing (
>> https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/3219) and will comment on some open
>> issues on the pip tracker. But I'm thinking that for now we should go with
>> some printed message first. Something like "please use ``pip install .`` if
>> you want reliable uninstall behavior. See <somelink> for more details".
>>
>> Pip has worked quite well for me in the past, but the above makes me
>> thing it's not much of an improvement over use of setuptools.....
>>
>
> Which version of pip?
>

Latest master (it's 'develop' branch). Recent released versions will be the
same, because there are open issues for these things.

Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20151102/a28443df/attachment.html>