> The thing that made it “official” was a short tutorial [1] on packaging.python.org, which is the PyPA’s packaging user guide. Also of note is the Python.org domain used. It makes it sound as if Pipenv was endorsed by the Python core team. PyPA (Python Packaging Authority) is a separate organization — they are responsible for the packaging parts (including pypi.org, setuptools, pip, wheel, virtualenv, etc.) of Python
> Use Pipenv to manage library dependencies when developing Python applications. See Managing Application Dependencies for more details on using pipenv.
> Consider other tools such as pip when pipenv does not meet your use case.
That recommendation is absolutely unambiguous.
[0] https://packaging.python.org/guides/tool-recommendations/
> It's an official project of PyPA still, it's just not being pushed as the "be-all-end-all" option.
Those tools are relegated to a small section at the end, whereas the main body of the text says "Pipenv is recommended for collaborative projects..."
I'd say that counts as a specific endorsement of Pipenv. I guess it's an endorsement by the "Python Packaging Authority" rather than "Python Core" but it's pretty hard for someone at the tutorial-reading level to perceive the difference.
[1] https://packaging.python.org/guides/tool-recommendations/
NO! This is a common misconception[1].
Edit: Correction it's not endorsed by the core Python team but it's recommended by the Python Packaging Authority in various places. See replies below for more info.
[1] https://chriswarrick.com/blog/2018/07/17/pipenv-promises-a-l...