News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Pipfile for Python by quodlibetor on Tuesday November 22, 2016 @12:08PM (#13015513)
For the non-install case, like when you're running a package index, having to eval the dependency specifying is horrible.

This is also why wheels (the new python package format) use a static file instead of setup.py. The Python ecosystem has been trying to get off of "just eval setup.py" for years.

Re:Pipfile for Python by xapata on Tuesday November 22, 2016 @12:23PM (#13015622)
I'm not sure why avoiding arbitrary code execution during install is important when you're going to do arbitrary code execution shortly after. What else is the purpose of installing a package?
Re:Pipfile for Python by theptip on Tuesday November 22, 2016 @12:41PM (#13015775)
> For the non-install case, like when you're running a package index

You have just ignored the point that your parent point was making. It's not the install case that they were complaining about.

Re:Pipfile for Python by xapata on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @02:51AM (#13020912)
True. It's surprising to optimize for such a rare kind of user.
Re:Pipfile for Python by baq on Tuesday November 22, 2016 @03:23PM (#13017326)
trying to not run arbitrary code on the enterprise network is prudent.
Re:Pipfile for Python by xapata on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @02:52AM (#13020915)
But that'd happen anyway when the installed package gets executed.