Thoughts on switching to pipenv?

[FlipEnergy]

I see you guys use straight up requirements.txt
This is fine for the docs but for development, CI and releasing, I think it's be nice to switch to pipenv. I'm happy to make a PR to help with this.

I'm raising this issue because it wasn't even obvious what version of python you guys are working on for Archivy. The black workflow runs python 3.8 but the other ones run python 3.7.

EDIT: FROM python:3.9-alpine okay found my answer. Yeah not a huge deal but may be wise to streamline it all to python 3.8.

[Uzay-G]

What do you think about this @srevinsaju ?

[FlipEnergy]

Hey. I opened this on a whim and since this isn't really an issue I'm gonna close this. Don't feel pressured that you need to continue the discussion,

[srevinsaju]

I have been personally been using Pipenv for testing archivy, and now am moving other projects to pipenv instead of the old pip. This is safer and helps to keep the dependencies in their own virtual environments.

[srevinsaju]

I just committed my Pipfile and Pipfile.lock which I had been using for archivy in #216 , in case if it would be useful.

All you need to do is

pipenv sync && pipenv lock
pipenv run archivy

to do the linting (I.e. to lint the source code with black)

pipenv run lint