Re:Explicit bootstrapping of pip in Python installations
by dangerlibrary on Tuesday October 22, 2013 @10:10AM
(#6591963)
I don't think effective package management solutions were really pioneered by node and NPM.
You could pretty easily re-write your comment and say "Look at the trails Debian + apt have blazed. That's the right move."
Re:Explicit bootstrapping of pip in Python installations
by knappe on Tuesday October 22, 2013 @10:30AM
(#6592126)
Or, for a more apt (heh) comparison:
Re:Explicit bootstrapping of pip in Python installations
by jjwiseman on Tuesday October 22, 2013 @05:37PM
(#6595173)
"If you are writing a package manager for a new non-js language, do whatever it takes to get that new language to load modules the way node does. The right way."
http://dominictarr.com/post/25516279897/why-you-should-never...
http://dontkry.com/posts/code/modules-the-right-way.html
To be more specific, what npm does that pip, debian, and rubygems don't do is nested dependencies, which is a wonderful advancement.
Re:Explicit bootstrapping of pip in Python installations
by riffraff on Tuesday October 22, 2013 @10:29AM
(#6592118)
rubygems has been bundled with ruby since 2009, and perl has had cpan since about forever.
Re:Explicit bootstrapping of pip in Python installations
by njharman on Tuesday October 22, 2013 @12:43PM
(#6593111)
npm badly re-implements what others have done dozens of times. The whole node ecology suffers heavily from "not invented here" syndrome.
Re:Explicit bootstrapping of pip in Python installations
by mbreese on Tuesday October 22, 2013 @10:10AM
(#6591967)
Isn't virtualenv going to be bundled too?
Re:Explicit bootstrapping of pip in Python installations
by tbatterii on Tuesday October 22, 2013 @10:17AM
(#6592031)
a flavor of virtualenv was bundled in 3.3 (http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.3.0/) but without pip or easy_install it was a pretty useless feature IMO.
Next up: Local package installs.