[Python-Dev] Status of the built-in virtualenv functionality in 3.3

[Éric Araujo]

Le 06/10/2011 17:31, Barry Warsaw a écrit :
> I agree we can't use virtualenv, and shouldn't use virtualize.  I'm afraid
> that picking something cute might make it harder to discover.  `pythonv` or
> `cpythonv` seem like good choices to me.  Maybe the former, so we could
> potentially have jythonv, etc.

I’m not sure we would.  The feature is two-fold:
- changes to getpath.c, site.py and other usual suspects so that CPython
supports being run in an isolated environment;
- a new module used to create isolated environments.

The first part is implemented in CPython; the second part needs a module
name to replace virtualenv.  python -m pythonv doesn’t seem right.

python -m makeenv?
python -m workon? (idea from virtualenvwrapper)
python -m nest?

Cheers