[Distutils] Request for comment: Proposal to change behaviour of pip install

[Ralf Gommers]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:16 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 26 Jun 2016 23:37, "Pradyun Gedam" <pradyunsg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello List!
>> >
>> > I feel it’s fine to hold back the other changes for later but the
>> > upgrade-strategy change should get shipped out to the world as quickly
>> as
>> > possible. Even how the change is exposed the user can also be discussed
>> later.
>> >
>> > I request the list members to focus on only the change of the default
>> > upgrade strategy to be non-eager.
>> >
>> > Does anyone have any concerns regarding the change of the default
>> upgrade
>> > strategy to be non-eager? If not, let’s get just that shipped out as
>> soon as possible.
>>
>> Pairing that change with an explicit "pip upgrade-all" command would get
>> a +1 from me, especially if there was a printed warning when the new
>> upgrade strategy skips packages the old one would have updated.
>>
> Please do not mix upgrade with upgrade-all. The latter is blocked by lack
> of a SAT solver for a long time, and at the current pace that status may
> not change for another couple of years. Also mixing these up is
> unnecessary, and it was discussed last year on this list already to move
> ahead with upgrade:
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.distutils.devel/24219
>

And, on request of Robert all discussion was moved to
https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/3786, so we probably should not continue
this thread.

Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20160629/f7c3c7ab/attachment.html>