On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 14:09, Tzu-ping Chung <uranu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On the other hand, there are many other application dependency management > tools out there, and as far as I know none of them actually have a lock file > format with interoperability. JavaScript, for example, has maybe the most > bipartisan state in that area (in npm and Yarn), and I don’t recall reading > anything of this nature at all. I’m not saying this is wrong, but it’s > interesting that Python, being relatively behind in this particular area, has > this somewhat unique proposal here. (Again, this does not imply it’s either > good or bad, just unique.)
If it's intended as being specifically managed by pipenv, then a generic name and a standard aren't appropriate. The fact that "pip" is part of the name doesn't indicate a (current) relationship to pip. Given Donald's clarification, I'd say this isn't something we need to discuss at the moment. pipenv/pipfile/pipfile.lock are their own thing, and independent of pip. There's no support in pip for them, and there won't be unless/until there's a concrete proposal on the table. In the meantime, pip's alive and kicking, and no-one is making it legacy or proposing that anyone migrate away from it. Maybe there's some confusion or overlap over functionality, but that's a documentation/PR issue, and not one I'm going to get up tight about (other than to say let the people who made the statements do the job of clarifying any misunderstandings ;-)) Paul -- 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/EEG7DYQYA6EHFSXE7BOPFC4VAZOBKNIF/
