Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove references to pipenv #589

Closed
9034725985 opened this issue Jan 22, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Remove references to pipenv #589

9034725985 opened this issue Jan 22, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@9034725985
Copy link

I just learned that Pipenv is no longer an official project.
I request we remove references to it from the page
https://packaging.python.org/guides/tool-recommendations/
This issue is a part of work that reverses #437 and clarifies that pipenv is not an official project.

It can't even go about the simple process of:

  1. pipenv install
  2. pipenv uninstall --all-dev

without giving an error.
See
pypa/pipenv#3469
to track this issue.

@Conan-Kudo
Copy link

It's an official project of PyPA still, it's just not being pushed as the "be-all-end-all" option.

@theacodes
Copy link
Member

Hi, Pipenv is still a project managed by PyPA members and lives under the PyPA org. As far as I'm aware, this status has not changed.

The only requirement for a project to join the PyPA is that its maintainers agree to our Code of Conduct. Additionally, it isn't a requirement that a project be part of the PyPA to be a part of this documentation or part of the tool recommendations, it just has to be in common usage and follow the patterns and expectations (loose consensus) of the disutils-sig mailing list and packaging working group.

I'm going to close this issue, but please let me know if you have any other questions.

@ncoghlan
Copy link
Member

Note that the referenced pipenv bug report was actually a Fedora downstream packaging bug (there was an error in the switch from bundled dependencies to shared dependencies)

@mstrofbass
Copy link

mstrofbass commented Feb 6, 2020

While complete removal of references to pipenv may be unnecessary, given the clear dysfunction in the pipenv project (see: pypa/pipenv#4058), it should be featured less prominently in the documentation. With it being set out as it is on the tool recommendations page, most people will simply opt for it instead of exploring the others, completely unaware of how dysfunctional it is.

At the very least, the documentation should not say to "[u]se Pipenv to manage library dependencies when developing Python applications." It should either simply provide a list of options with no description (bad) or a list of options with descriptions that indicate the differences and use cases (good). Simply saying to use something else if pipenv does not meet one's needs as a recommendation is silly - most of the people won't know whether it meets their needs until they use it and waste time figuring out it doesn't.

Although we can't get rid of the inherent bias in an ordered list, we can reduce the prominence of the reference to pipenv so that people will be less assuming.

@hartwork
Copy link

@theacodes please consider re-opening. 69c4127 did not fix that pipenv is the primary recommendation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants