Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:53 PM, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote: > Is there a pip equivalent of "python setup.py develop"? Kinda answered this already when replying to Chuck, but: yes, it's `pip install -e ` (the -e is short for --editable), not that you would need it necessarily

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > [...] > > I believe that this would also break both 'easy_install numpy', and > > attempts to install numpy via the setup_requires= argument to > >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > [...] > > I gave it a shot the other day. Pip keeps a record of the path to the > repo > > and in order to cleanup I needed to

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Nathaniel

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

Is there a pip equivalent of "python setup.py develop"? On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 5:33 PM Charles R Harris wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Charles R Harris >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > >> [...] >> > I gave it a shot

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> [...] >> > I believe that this would also break both

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:31 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > Apparently it is not well known that if you have a Python project > source tree (e.g., a numpy checkout), then the correct way to install > it is NOT to type > > python setup.py install # bad and broken! >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > [...] > I gave it a shot the other day. Pip keeps a record of the path to the repo > and in order to cleanup I needed to search out the file and delete the repo > path. There is probably a better way to do

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 3:32 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:44 AM,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Oct 27, 2015 6:08 AM, wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > > What's the equivalent of > > python setup.py build_ext --inplace > > It's > python setup.py build_ext --inplace > > ;-) > Ok, Sorry, I

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

Would this happen at the level of numpy's setup.py script or would it be implemented in numpy.distutils? I'm asking as the developer of a package that uses numpy.distutils to manage C extensions. On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:28 AM, wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:59

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Oct 27, 2015 6:48 AM, "James E.H. Turner" wrote: >> >> Apparently it is not well known that if you have a Python project >> source tree (e.g., a numpy checkout), then the correct way to install >> it is NOT to type >> >>python setup.py install # bad and broken! >> >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

Interestingly, conda actually does "setup.py install" in the recipe for numpy: https://github.com/conda/conda-recipes/blob/master/numpy-openblas/build.sh I'm not sure if this is the one they use to build the anaconda package, I think they have internal versions of most of the recipes on

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

Conda is for binary installs and largely targeted for end-users. This topic pertains to source installs, and is mostly relevant to developers, testers, and those who like to live on the bleeding edge of a particular project. On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Edison Gustavo Muenz <

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Edison Gustavo Muenz < edisongust...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm sorry if this is out-of-topic, but I'm curious on why nobody mentioned > Conda yet. > Conda is a binary distribution system, whereas we are talking about installing from sources. You will need a way to

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Oct 27, 2015 8:34 AM, "Nathan Goldbaum" wrote: > > Would this happen at the level of numpy's setup.py script or would it be implemented in numpy.distutils? I'm asking as the developer of a package that uses numpy.distutils to manage C extensions. NumPy's setup.py, no

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

Can someone here who understands more about distribution maybe write a blog post detailing: - why these setup.py commands are bad - which alternative corresponds to each command and why it's better - where to find information about this For example, I had never heard of "twine", and

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: Updating this list for comments made after I sent it and now that I've looked in more detail at what the less common commands do: > So if/when we accept the proposal in this thread, I'm thinking we should > make a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 4:28 PM, wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Oct 27, 2015 6:08 AM, wrote: >> > >> [...] >> > >> > >> > What's the equivalent of >> > python setup.py build_ext

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

Thanks Ralf! The pointer to Python Packaging User Guide is already gold! (But a wider discussion e.g. in the NumPy repo, mirroring the docstring conventions, would also be good!) On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 11:35 PM,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote: > Can someone here who understands more about distribution maybe write a > blog post detailing: > > - why these setup.py commands are bad > - which alternative corresponds to each command and why it's better > -

Re: [Numpy-discussion] deprecate fromstring() for text reading?

FWIW, when I needed a fast Fixed Width reader for a very large dataset last year, I found that np.genfromtext() was faster than pandas' read_fwf(). IIRC, pandas' text reading code fell back to pure python for fixed width scenarios. On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

I'm sorry if this is out-of-topic, but I'm curious on why nobody mentioned Conda yet. Is there any particular reason for not using it? On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 11:48 AM, James E.H. Turner wrote: > Apparently it is not well known that if you have a Python project >> source

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal: stop supporting 'setup.py install'; start requiring 'pip install .' instead

Apparently it is not well known that if you have a Python project source tree (e.g., a numpy checkout), then the correct way to install it is NOT to type python setup.py install # bad and broken! but rather to type pip install . Though I haven't studied it exhaustively, it always