Opened 6 years ago
Closed 2 years ago
#21033 closed defect (duplicate)
package type = pip needs documentation
Reported by: | mkoeppe | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix |
Component: | build | Keywords: | |
Cc: | vdelecroix, vbraun, embray, jdemeyer, leif, jhpalmieri | Merged in: | |
Authors: | Reviewers: | Matthias Koeppe, Samuel Lelièvre | |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | #29287 | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
There are now several packages where build/pkgs/PACKAGE/type
is "pip".
Is there any documentation on this?
Some related tickets:
- #20218: Use pip to install Python dependencies
- #19213: For packages listed in build/pkgs/piprules, allow 'sage --optional' to list them
- #19680: Add mock, pytest, tox, virtualenv optional packages
Discussions:
Change History (14)
comment:1 follow-up: ↓ 5 Changed 6 years ago by
comment:2 follow-up: ↓ 6 Changed 6 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by
Also, shouldn't the way in which a package is installed (traditional way vs. pip way) be orthogonal to whether a package is considered standard, optional, or experimental?
Certainly not standard since we need to ship the sources of standard packages with Sage. They aren't really optional nor experimental either. I see it as just a shortcut to ./sage --pip install PKG
.
comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by
The pip-type package could be enhanced to use a mirrored tarball if there is one, then we could also use it for standard packages. Though really the benefit seems pretty small compared to putting pip install
in the spkg-install
.
comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 1 Changed 6 years ago by
Replying to jdemeyer:
I don't know if everybody agrees to "officially" support the
pip
type packages. It was mainly meant as stopgap for some disappearing old-style packages.
"Official" or not, documentation is better than no documentation, no?
comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 2 Changed 6 years ago by
comment:7 Changed 6 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:8 Changed 6 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:9 Changed 6 years ago by
- Cc leif added
- Description modified (diff)
- Milestone changed from sage-7.3 to sage-7.4
comment:10 Changed 2 years ago by
- Cc jhpalmieri added
- Milestone changed from sage-7.4 to sage-9.1
comment:11 Changed 2 years ago by
- Dependencies set to #29287
- Status changed from new to needs_review
#29287 is adding documentation
comment:12 Changed 2 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-9.1 to sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix
comment:13 Changed 2 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Matthias Koeppe, Samuel Lelièvre
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
Fixed by #29287.
comment:14 Changed 2 years ago by
- Resolution set to duplicate
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
I don't know if everybody agrees to "officially" support the
pip
type packages. It was mainly meant as stopgap for some disappearing old-style packages.