On Sep 18, 2015, at 07:53 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >I currently use pyvenv directly, but I agree with starting a migration >to only supporting the more explicit "python -m venv". There's always >an inherent ambiguity on *nix with unqualified version sensitive >Python commands as to whether they're referring to Python 2 or 3, as >the answer often depends on *how old* the particular script is (e.g. >pip and virtualenv relate to the Python 2 installation, while pyvenv >relates to the Python 3 installation).
On Debian, we often use things like -2 or -3 suffixes, but there's no naming standard, and you inevitably get to monstrosities like nose2-3. ;) For scripts which have to be Python-version specific, the slight loss of usability for `python -m blah` outweighs the ambiguity and ugliness of the direct alternative. >There's one slightly oddity in the migration, which is that "pyvenv" >will still run even if you're in an activated Python 2 virtual >environment, while "python -m venv" fails. The answer is to use a >qualified Python version in the latter call. One thing that came up in a similar discussion is pip, and the suggested move to `python -m pip`, which makes a lot of sense. However, *inside* a virtualenv, there's no ambiguity about the Python version associated with direct `pip` invocation, so it still makes sense to install that there. Cheers, -Barry
pgpltiap26Kr2.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
