The truth is that it’s basically impossible to gauge bugs in pip vs bugs in our patches to it which are often a lot more likely — reproductions of edge cases can be impossible but there are specific things I know we broke (like parsing certain kinds of extras, previously) — mostly bugs land in pips issue tracker before we report them or we will direct people there. We have like 2 active maintainers and we are maintaining like 15 pipenv related projects so we normally just point people at pip rather than file an issue. I am usually on irc as well if needed, and I often ask for clarification there
Dan Ryan // pipenv maintainer gh: @techalchemy > On Aug 20, 2018, at 4:32 AM, Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks. Is the state of affairs as you described them what you're > planning for the future as well, or do you anticipate any changes > worthy of note? > > Also, are any of the bugs filed in pipenv's tracker due to bugs or > rough spots in pip -- is there a way to find those, like by using a > label? It would be good to be able to know about those so pip can > improve and become more useful. It doesn't seem like any bugs have > been filed in pip's tracker in the past year by any of pipenv's top > contributors. That seems a bit surprising to me given pipenv's heavy > reliance on pip (together with the fact that I know pip has its share > of issues), or is there another way you have of communicating > regarding things that interconnect with pip? > > Thanks, > --Chris > > > >> On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 12:51 AM, Dan Ryan <d...@danryan.co> wrote: >> Sure I can grab that— we patch pip because we use some internals to handle >> resolution and we have some bugs around that currently. They aren’t >> upstreamed because they aren’t actually present in pip, only in pipenv. >> Pipenv crosses back and forth across the virtualenv boundary during the >> process. Pipenv relies on piptools and vendors a patched version of pip to >> ensure consistency as well as to provide a few hacks around querying the >> index. We do have a bit of reimplementation around some kinds of logic, >> with the largest overlap being in parsing of requirements. >> >> As we handle some resolution, which isn’t really something pip does, there >> is no cli interface to achieve this. I maintain a library (as of last week) >> which provides compatibility shims between pip versions 8-current. It is a >> good idea to use the cli, but we already spend enough resources forking >> subprocesses into the background that it is a lot more efficient to use the >> internals, which I track quite closely. The preference toward cli >> interaction is largely to allow internal api breakage which we don’t mind. >> >> For the most part, we have open channels of communication as necessary. We >> rely as heavily as we can on pip, packaging, and setuptools to connect the >> dots, retrieve package info, etc. >> >> Dan Ryan // pipenv maintainer >> gh: @techalchemy >> >>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 2:41 AM, Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdo...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Can someone explain to me the relationship between pipenv and pip, >>> from the perspective of pipenv's maintainers? >>> >>> For example, does pipenv currently reimplement anything that pip tries >>> to do, or does it simply call out to pip through the CLI or through >>> its internal API's? Does it have any preferences or future plans in >>> this regard? How about upstreaming to pip fixes or things that would >>> help pipenv? >>> >>> I've been contributing to pip more lately, and I had a look at >>> pipenv's repository for the first time today. >>> https://github.com/pypa/pipenv >>> >>> Given that pip's code was recently made internal, I was a bit >>> surprised to see that pipenv vendors and patches pip: >>> https://github.com/pypa/pipenv/tree/master/pipenv/patched/notpip >>> Before I had always assumed that pipenv used pip's CLI (because that's >>> what pip says you should do). >>> >>> I also noticed that some bugs in pipenv's tracker seem closely related >>> to pip's behavior, but I don't recall seeing any bugs or PR's in pip's >>> tracker reported from pipenv maintainers. >>> >>> Without knowing a whole lot more than what I've stated, one concern I >>> have is around fragmentation, duplication of work, and repeating >>> mistakes (or introducing new ones) if a lot of work is going into >>> pipenv without coordinating with pip. Is this in any way similar to >>> the beginning of what happened with distutils, setuptools, and >>> distribute that we are still recovering from? >>> >>> --Chris >>> -- >>> Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org >>> https://mail.python.org/mm3/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ >>> Message archived at >>> https://mail.python.org/mm3/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/2QECNWSHNEW7UBB24M2K5BISYJY7GMZF/ -- Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mm3/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/mm3/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/6MRQSH74PEPBYIMLJUVGJ5SBOP6ZNPP2/
