[Distutils] PEP DRAFT - Inclusion of pip bootstrap in Python installation

[Nick Coghlan]

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:16 AM, PJ Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Richard Jones <richard at python.org> wrote:
>> The Fedora variant of Linux has had a separate program called "pip" (a Perl
>> package installer) available for install for some time. The current Python "pip"
>> program is installed as "pip-python". It is hoped that the Fedora community will
>> resolve this issue by renaming the Perl installer.
>
> A modest suggestion: renaming pip to "pypi" (Python Package Installer)
> will address this and other issues, especially if the 'pypi' command
> grows register/publish functions as well.

Unfortunately, this would just make the confusion with pypy worse, as
well as put the community through yet another name change. Persisting
with the "pip" name seems to be the best of the available options (the
only wrinkle is that Perl tool sitting in the Fedora repos, but as far
as we can tell that's just an old package that even Perl people don't
use)

> Yes, it puts pip in a privileged position, but really it's just going
> to be acknowledging the status quo.  As soon as pip can handle
> multi-version installs, binaries, and plugin scenarios as well as
> easy_install can, there will be no reason to keep easy_install around
> or bother upgrading it to do TUF or whatever else comes down the pike.
>  And I'm not aware of any other competition (buildout isn't really
> aimed at the same space), so I don't think there's any reason not to
> just bless "pip" as *the* "pypi" tool.

Yep, that's where all this is going (except we'll be keeping the pip name).

Cheers,
Nick.

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