[…]
The way I solve this problem (and perhaps many other users, too)
is simple: I don’t use virtual environments. So Ipip install
everything that I need for such scripts in my main (not system)
python and then everything… just works. (I agree that knowing
the dependencies is useful even in my case, but using something
likepip-runseems heavyweight.)This is a case where
venvs are a classic non-solution to a
non-problem, except in the edge case of conflicting dependencies
(see also my rant
here).
But those are not really solved by this proposal, since it doesn’t
specify version numbers.
[…]
It seems orthogonal to the use of venvs, at least to me. I
personally would actually use it to determine what needs to be in
the venvs I create on the fly for my random one-off scripts. As I
mentioned earlier, this idea is something I (and many others, I
think?) are already doing, but it offers a standardized format for
listing the Python package dependencies of a script within the
script itself so that creating the environment that script needs
(either manually in advance, or in an automated fashion on the fly)
is a task we can collaborate on interoperable solutions for.