Python pip

Python pip

[Gary Thomas]

Just curious, does anyone know why OE-core has python3-pip
but python-pip is relegated to meta-oe?

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Python pip

[Paul Eggleton]

Hi Gary,

On Thursday 05 November 2015 05:39:21 Gary Thomas wrote:
> Just curious, does anyone know why OE-core has python3-pip
> but python-pip is relegated to meta-oe?

I think it has to do with pip being supplied as part of the standard python 3 
distribution from 3.4 onwards. I think for simplicity's sake it might be 
argued that python-pip could be in the same place though.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: Python pip

[Gary Thomas]

On 2015-11-05 07:14, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> On Thursday 05 November 2015 05:39:21 Gary Thomas wrote:
>> Just curious, does anyone know why OE-core has python3-pip
>> but python-pip is relegated to meta-oe?
>
> I think it has to do with pip being supplied as part of the standard python 3
> distribution from 3.4 onwards. I think for simplicity's sake it might be
> argued that python-pip could be in the same place though.

Thanks, I'll consider sending a patch set for that.

Sadly, at this point, both packages can't be installed at the
same time as they both call the result "/usr/bin/pip".  Maybe
in keeping with the python/python3 naming, the python3 version
should be installed as pip3?

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Python pip

[Alejandro Hernandez]

On 05/11/15 08:25, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2015-11-05 07:14, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>> Hi Gary,
>>
>> On Thursday 05 November 2015 05:39:21 Gary Thomas wrote:
>>> Just curious, does anyone know why OE-core has python3-pip
>>> but python-pip is relegated to meta-oe?
>>
>> I think it has to do with pip being supplied as part of the standard 
>> python 3
>> distribution from 3.4 onwards. I think for simplicity's sake it might be
>> argued that python-pip could be in the same place though.
Yes, in fact, python3-pip was included on oe-core after the upgrade to 
python3.4 since it's now a requirement, I agree, we probably should 
include python-pip on oe-core too
>
> Thanks, I'll consider sending a patch set for that.
>
> Sadly, at this point, both packages can't be installed at the
> same time as they both call the result "/usr/bin/pip".  Maybe
> in keeping with the python/python3 naming, the python3 version
> should be installed as pip3?

python3-pip recipe had to be created to avoid an issue with the default 
pip installation by python3.4, its now handled by distutils3, if its 
only a matter of changing the binary name afterwards from pip to pip3 I 
see no problem doing this, I am hoping this solves it, but just 
mentioning that we already had some issues with this, because of the 
"defaults" python3 expects

Re: Python pip

[Paul Eggleton]

On Monday 09 November 2015 10:11:30 Alejandro Hernandez wrote:
> On 05/11/15 08:25, Gary Thomas wrote:
> > On 2015-11-05 07:14, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> >> Hi Gary,
> >> 
> >> On Thursday 05 November 2015 05:39:21 Gary Thomas wrote:
> >>> Just curious, does anyone know why OE-core has python3-pip
> >>> but python-pip is relegated to meta-oe?
> >> 
> >> I think it has to do with pip being supplied as part of the standard
> >> python 3
> >> distribution from 3.4 onwards. I think for simplicity's sake it might be
> >> argued that python-pip could be in the same place though.
> 
> Yes, in fact, python3-pip was included on oe-core after the upgrade to
> python3.4 since it's now a requirement, I agree, we probably should
> include python-pip on oe-core too
> 
> > Thanks, I'll consider sending a patch set for that.
> > 
> > Sadly, at this point, both packages can't be installed at the
> > same time as they both call the result "/usr/bin/pip".  Maybe
> > in keeping with the python/python3 naming, the python3 version
> > should be installed as pip3?
> 
> python3-pip recipe had to be created to avoid an issue with the default
> pip installation by python3.4, its now handled by distutils3, if its
> only a matter of changing the binary name afterwards from pip to pip3 I
> see no problem doing this, I am hoping this solves it, but just
> mentioning that we already had some issues with this, because of the
> "defaults" python3 expects

My question would be would renaming it to "pip3" be consistent with how this 
situation is handled on mainstream distributions?

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: Python pip

[Alejandro Hernandez]

On 09/11/15 10:17, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Monday 09 November 2015 10:11:30 Alejandro Hernandez wrote:
>> On 05/11/15 08:25, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>> On 2015-11-05 07:14, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>>> Hi Gary,
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday 05 November 2015 05:39:21 Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>>> Just curious, does anyone know why OE-core has python3-pip
>>>>> but python-pip is relegated to meta-oe?
>>>> I think it has to do with pip being supplied as part of the standard
>>>> python 3
>>>> distribution from 3.4 onwards. I think for simplicity's sake it might be
>>>> argued that python-pip could be in the same place though.
>> Yes, in fact, python3-pip was included on oe-core after the upgrade to
>> python3.4 since it's now a requirement, I agree, we probably should
>> include python-pip on oe-core too
>>
>>> Thanks, I'll consider sending a patch set for that.
>>>
>>> Sadly, at this point, both packages can't be installed at the
>>> same time as they both call the result "/usr/bin/pip".  Maybe
>>> in keeping with the python/python3 naming, the python3 version
>>> should be installed as pip3?
>> python3-pip recipe had to be created to avoid an issue with the default
>> pip installation by python3.4, its now handled by distutils3, if its
>> only a matter of changing the binary name afterwards from pip to pip3 I
>> see no problem doing this, I am hoping this solves it, but just
>> mentioning that we already had some issues with this, because of the
>> "defaults" python3 expects
> My question would be would renaming it to "pip3" be consistent with how this
> situation is handled on mainstream distributions?
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
Apparently... yes, at least it looks like it on Ubuntu-based distros, 
they use pip -> pip2 and also another binary for pip3.

Re: Python pip

[Gary Thomas]

On 2015-11-09 09:11, Alejandro Hernandez wrote:
>
>
> On 05/11/15 08:25, Gary Thomas wrote:
>> On 2015-11-05 07:14, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>> Hi Gary,
>>>
>>> On Thursday 05 November 2015 05:39:21 Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>> Just curious, does anyone know why OE-core has python3-pip
>>>> but python-pip is relegated to meta-oe?
>>>
>>> I think it has to do with pip being supplied as part of the standard python 3
>>> distribution from 3.4 onwards. I think for simplicity's sake it might be
>>> argued that python-pip could be in the same place though.
> Yes, in fact, python3-pip was included on oe-core after the upgrade to python3.4 since it's now a requirement, I agree, we probably should include python-pip on oe-core too
>>
>> Thanks, I'll consider sending a patch set for that.
>>
>> Sadly, at this point, both packages can't be installed at the
>> same time as they both call the result "/usr/bin/pip".  Maybe
>> in keeping with the python/python3 naming, the python3 version
>> should be installed as pip3?
>
> python3-pip recipe had to be created to avoid an issue with the default pip installation by python3.4, its now handled by distutils3, if its only a matter of changing the binary
> name afterwards from pip to pip3 I see no problem doing this, I am hoping this solves it, but just mentioning that we already had some issues with this, because of the "defaults"
> python3 expects

In that case, we could rename the Python2 pip as pip2.  I think
they really need different names as they will be installing
packages into very different locations Python2 vs Python3.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Python pip

[Alejandro Hernandez]

I am sending a patch to upgrade Python3 to 3.5, and I will include the 
pip3 change in it, currently pip3 is installed as pip, pip3 and pip3.5, 
so its just a matter of removing 'pip', to leave it available for pip2 
and make it default when python2-pip is installed, it seems to be 
working correctly that way, just thought I'd let you know.

Cheers,

Alejandro

On 09/11/15 10:27, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2015-11-09 09:11, Alejandro Hernandez wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 05/11/15 08:25, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>> On 2015-11-05 07:14, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>>> Hi Gary,
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday 05 November 2015 05:39:21 Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>>> Just curious, does anyone know why OE-core has python3-pip
>>>>> but python-pip is relegated to meta-oe?
>>>>
>>>> I think it has to do with pip being supplied as part of the 
>>>> standard python 3
>>>> distribution from 3.4 onwards. I think for simplicity's sake it 
>>>> might be
>>>> argued that python-pip could be in the same place though.
>> Yes, in fact, python3-pip was included on oe-core after the upgrade 
>> to python3.4 since it's now a requirement, I agree, we probably 
>> should include python-pip on oe-core too
>>>
>>> Thanks, I'll consider sending a patch set for that.
>>>
>>> Sadly, at this point, both packages can't be installed at the
>>> same time as they both call the result "/usr/bin/pip".  Maybe
>>> in keeping with the python/python3 naming, the python3 version
>>> should be installed as pip3?
>>
>> python3-pip recipe had to be created to avoid an issue with the 
>> default pip installation by python3.4, its now handled by distutils3, 
>> if its only a matter of changing the binary
>> name afterwards from pip to pip3 I see no problem doing this, I am 
>> hoping this solves it, but just mentioning that we already had some 
>> issues with this, because of the "defaults"
>> python3 expects
>
> In that case, we could rename the Python2 pip as pip2.  I think
> they really need different names as they will be installing
> packages into very different locations Python2 vs Python3.
>