#19187: Add rules for installing packages with pip
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jdemeyer | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: critical | Milestone: sage-6.9
Component: build | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Jeroen Demeyer | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/jdemeyer/ticket/19187 | fdba3ee0772b1885c3f60cb35f850fee576a7f9a
Dependencies: #19119 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by vdelecroix):
* status: needs_review => needs_work
Comment:
I just tested all the list of packages provied in [comment:5 comment:5]
and everything worked fine.
Replying to [comment:13 jdemeyer]:
> Replying to [comment:10 vdelecroix]:
> > Do you consider your solution as temporary?
> No.
Then it should be complient with `sage --optional` which lists the
packages. Right now (after installing all the packages supported) I got:
{{{
$ sage --optional
beautifulsoup........................... 3.2.1 (not_installed)
biopython............................... 1.61 (not_installed)
brian................................... 1.4.1.p0 (not_installed)
mpi4py.................................. 1.2.2 (not_installed)
trac.................................... 0.11.5.p0 (not_installed)
etc
}}}
And also with `sage -t` that uses optional packages.
{{{
$ sage -t whatever
...
Using --optional=cbc,mpir,python2,sage,scons
...
}}}
> > I am afraid that it would become an open door to have thousands of
packages in `piprules`.
> which is problem because...? Besides, we didn't have "thousands" of
optional/experimental packages before, so I don't see why this would
suddenly become thousands now.
Because it becomes now very easy. But you might be right.
> > Shouldn't we reorient users toward `sage -pip install X`?
> I don't think so, because how is the user supposed to know if he should
use `sage -i PKG` or `sage --pip install PKG`? With my patch here, the
user just needs to know `sage -i PKG`.
No. And as Karl-Dieter said it would be good to add tests for them `#
optional - biopython`.
Vincent
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19187#comment:17>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
