[Python-ideas] Looking for input to help with the pip situation

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sun Nov 12 18:18:48 EST 2017

On 13 November 2017 at 02:59, Brendan Barnwell <brenbarn at brenbarn.net> wrote:
> On 2017-11-12 05:18, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> * the `pip install` option really is nicer looking than `python -m pip
>> install`, and it only has actual problems in the presence of multiple
>> Python versions and when upgrading pip itself on Windows (plus: lots
>> of third party guides recommend it, as do pypi.org project pages)
>         Is there any *advantage* to using `pip install` instead of `python
> -m install`?  If not, could we at least change everything under Python/pip
> control (e.g., pip documentation) to never recommend `pip` and always
> recommend `python -m pip` instead, and encourage all third-party
> documentation to always use `python -m pip` and never use `pip`?

We've already changed most of them (pypi.org itself is the main one
that we haven't changed it yet).

However, there are still per-project READMEs out there that suggest
"easy_install project" and direct invocation of "python setup.py
install", so it really isn't appealing to layer yet another mandatory
change in the recommended spelling of the installation command and
create yet another point of confusion - it will be much nicer overall
if we can retroactively make the existing "pip install" instructions
correct for most users, and leave "python -m pip install" to the
"Multiple versions of Python" and "Self-upgrading pip on Windows".


P.S. As a user, it's also genuinely irritating to have to always type
the "python -m " prefix when inside an active virtual environment, as
in that case, there isn't any ambiguity about which environment pip
should be manipulating or which version of Python it should be using.

Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list