From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id gEUwHpb4DmBAdAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 16:57:58 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id KJn3GZb4DmCMNAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 16:57:58 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1733094013B for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 16:57:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:53400 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l45Bc-0001XM-Or for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:57:56 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52690) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l45BI-0001VM-0U for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:57:36 -0500 Received: from 02d.relay.hey.com ([204.62.114.231]:48513) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l45BG-0004wQ-81 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:57:35 -0500 Received: from hey.com (bigip-vip-new.rw-ash-int.37signals.com [10.20.0.24]) by 02.relay.hey.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D97121BFF38; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 16:57:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hey.com; s=heymail; t=1611593853; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to; bh=YYmK8eC5Y65qdL6Pt/CinJ7OE9Lq71jL2/EGsVyagD4=; b=hw1Yt3rwVIRx2h6FJMEwPAx90UfC0YfhevlDS/v8V5X3nl64wuOPEXGjUt0aS1sn2Gj0Mw 1slF8hKfjFrt5Aufs25v0LPlbdwYl1PNajXUDej6AzFCJYOroRtk4HnQmZPUOtRH1bwvJl WtTkYxkytSr8Bl7op3WzmlH30a7hvXg5U8ROlyMrFcdeu58qqIgZI09LQKmr9WxBIiNFbw Laf1I4nVirDwVcQ9JIWHbBGRopVB+/iIQRtf489/Sg6Hv5vg835J0GZ80qCs5ATnOScGJz ZfaVGiwLx8Bm0J6ldLy7fmBuukGg4Kq90TtZnx+qpnddYCQwd8IW1ewoH3x2Zw== Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 16:57:32 +0000 From: Ryan Prior To: Lars-Dominik Braun Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Questions regarding Python packaging Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_600ef87c7d3fb_2af030203165"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=204.62.114.231; envelope-from=ryanprior@hey.com; helo=02d.relay.hey.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.55 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=hey.com header.s=heymail header.b=hw1Yt3rw; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=hey.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 1733094013B X-Spam-Score: -2.55 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: 4cbNWvJT+tks ----==_mimepart_600ef87c7d3fb_2af030203165 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0D On January 25, 2021, Lars-Dominik Braun wrote:=0D > Being able to demote setuptools and pip=0D > to ordinary packages is merely a side-effect, because they=E2=80=99re n= ot=0D > essential any more.=0D =0D I didn't read all of PEP 517, does it deprecate bundling pip with=0D Python? My understanding was that it just gives maintainers more options=0D= and makes setuptools less of a de-facto standard. I'll read it more=0D thoroughly later and see if I missed some important info there.=0D =0D Anyhow, even if a PEP says so, people's expectations to be able to use=0D= pip will not disappear suddenly. It's part of the expected interface to=0D= Python & I imagine removing it has the potential to cause much=0D confusion.=0D =0D > Your mail seems to be incomplete, it stopped after:=0D > > Also, for what it's worth, we already have python-minimal which=0D > doesn't=0D > > have pip, and it's only=0D =0D Ah darn, I'd meant to write it's only a little bit smaller, and I'm=0D interested to see where we can slim down the Python closure but others=0D= have managed to do so without cutting out pip & setuptools.=0D =0D All this being said, I'm not a huge fan of pip & setuptools, I like Guix=0D= because it frees me from having to think so much about such things, so I=0D= hope this doesn't come off as a defense of the tools themselves. I mean=0D= to defend the many Python users who have been trained with a certain set=0D= of expectations about the interfaces a Python package provides.=0D ----==_mimepart_600ef87c7d3fb_2af030203165 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D
=0D
=0D


On January 25, 2021, Lars-Dominik Braun <lar= s@6xq.net> wrote:
Being able to demote setuptools and= pip
to ordinary packages is merely a side-effect, because they=E2=80=99= re not
essential any more.

I didn't read all of P= EP 517, does it deprecate bundling pip with Python? My understanding was = that it just gives maintainers more options and makes setuptools less of = a de-facto standard. I'll read it more thoroughly later and see if I miss= ed some important info there.

Anyhow, even if a PEP says so, peopl= e's expectations to be able to use pip will not disappear suddenly. It's = part of the expected interface to Python & I imagine removing it has = the potential to cause much confusion.

Your mail= seems to be incomplete, it stopped after:
> Also, for what it's wo= rth, we already have python-minimal which doesn't
> have pip, and i= t's only

Ah darn, I'd meant to write it's only a lit= tle bit smaller, and I'm interested to see where we can slim down the Pyt= hon closure but others have managed to do so without cutting out pip &= ; setuptools.

All this being said, I'm not a huge fan of pip &= setuptools, I like Guix because it frees me from having to think so much= about such things, so I hope this doesn't come off as a defense of the t= ools themselves. I mean to defend the many Python users who have been tra= ined with a certain set of expectations about the interfaces a Python pac= kage provides.
=0D
=0D =0D =0D
=0D =0D =0D ----==_mimepart_600ef87c7d3fb_2af030203165--