On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 11:58:59 -0400
Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> Software integrators:
>
> * Linux distributions and other operating system vendors
> * Sumo redistributions (commercial or otherwise)
> * "Python based environments" (PTVS, Enthought Canopy, wakari.io,
> Python Anywhere, etc)
> * Softwar
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 11:28 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> > On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
> >> On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
> >>> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually
> know what tha
On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:37 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 18:28, Donald Stufft wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>>> On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipy
On 18 April 2014 18:28, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually know
what that
inc
On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
>> On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
>>> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually know
>>> what that
>>> includes. I’ve never used ipython except for the console.
On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
>> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually know what
>> that
>> includes. I’ve never used ipython except for the console.
>
> The hard bit is the QT Console, but that's because the
On 18 April 2014 18:16, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>> there are actually now *two* main ways of consuming
>> Python:
>
>
> Really? We'd better do something about that. We don't want
> anyone consuming Python -- we want some left over for the
> rest of us!
>
> (I'm making a serious
On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually know what
> that
> includes. I’ve never used ipython except for the console.
The hard bit is the QT Console, but that's because there aren't wheels
for PySide AFAICT.
Paul
_
Nick Coghlan wrote:
there are actually now *two* main ways of consuming
Python:
Really? We'd better do something about that. We don't want
anyone consuming Python -- we want some left over for the
rest of us!
(I'm making a serious point -- it's annoying when people use
the word "consume" as th
On Apr 18, 2014, at 5:48 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 22:40, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> Perhaps we can get the "pip install ipython" experience to a good
>> place faster than I currently expect, and we can duck this entire
>> question (at least for Windows and Mac OS X).
>
> Huh? Last
On 18 April 2014 22:40, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Perhaps we can get the "pip install ipython" experience to a good
> place faster than I currently expect, and we can duck this entire
> question (at least for Windows and Mac OS X).
Huh? Last time I tried, it was pretty trivial.
pip install pyzmq pyr
On 18 April 2014 17:22, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2014, at 5:08 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> On 18 April 2014 16:50, Donald Stufft wrote:
>>> So I’m not really worried about a competition or anything. I’m mostly
>>> worried
>>> about confusion of users. What you’re suggestion we give
On 18 April 2014 22:08, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Note that one of my requirements was that "pip install foo" *must* do
> the right thing in conda environments (whatever we decide the "right
> thing" means in that context).
Is this specifically a requirement for conda? Or do you expect the
same to be
On Apr 18, 2014, at 5:08 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 16:50, Donald Stufft wrote:
>> So I’m not really worried about a competition or anything. I’m mostly worried
>> about confusion of users. What you’re suggestion we give to use is *two* ways
>> to install Python packages (and 2
On 18 April 2014 21:59, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> What I am advocating for is that *we are currently doing it wrong*, as
> these are unlikely to be the best thing to install for most new Python
> users.
For Windows users at least, I disagree. I have directed a lot of
people to the python.org Windows
On 18 April 2014 16:50, Donald Stufft wrote:
> So I’m not really worried about a competition or anything. I’m mostly worried
> about confusion of users. What you’re suggestion we give to use is *two* ways
> to install Python packages (and 2 or 3 ways to virtualize a Python instance).
Note that on
On 18 April 2014 16:27, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 20:18, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
>> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving them both
>> well in a single tool is likely to be nigh on impossible. (I'm
On Apr 18, 2014, at 4:50 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> So I’m not really worried about a competition or anything. I’m mostly worried
> about confusion of users. What you’re suggestion we give to use is *two* ways
> to install Python packages (and 2 or 3 ways to virtualize a Python instance).
> That
On Apr 18, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 15:39, Donald Stufft wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 18, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>>> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
>>> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving th
On 18 April 2014 20:18, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving them both
> well in a single tool is likely to be nigh on impossible. (I'm aware
> we're really on the wrong list for that
On 18 April 2014 15:39, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
>> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving them both
>> well in a single tool is likely to be nigh on impo
On Apr 18, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving them both
> well in a single tool is likely to be nigh on impossible. (I'm aware
> we're really on the wrong list f
On 18 April 2014 12:55, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 16:58, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> As part of thrashing out the respective distribution ecosystem roles
>> of pip and conda (still a work in progress), we're at least converging
>> on the notion that there are actually now *two* main ways of
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 16:58, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> As part of thrashing out the respective distribution ecosystem roles
>> of pip and conda (still a work in progress), we're at least converging
>> on the notion that there are actually now *two* ma
On 18 April 2014 16:58, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> As part of thrashing out the respective distribution ecosystem roles
> of pip and conda (still a work in progress), we're at least converging
> on the notion that there are actually now *two* main ways of consuming
> Python: as a "software integrator"
Could I summarize that as "software integrators build from source, while
end users use an installer"? And the rest of the discussion is about which
installer (in the widest sense of the word) to recommend, where the choices
include Linux vendor distros, sumo Python distros, Mac/Win installers, as
w
26 matches
Mail list logo
