PEP 832: virtual environment discovery

I think things have calmed down enough that I think people understand the options being presented. That means it’s time to see what people think I should do with the PEP.

Below is a ranked choice poll I’m running for a week (until next Friday). The options run from “you’re wasting your time, Brett”, to “all the things!”, and various combinations in between. You will notice that if the PEP happens then I’m keeping .venv as a reasonable directory name suggestion for a virtual environment no matter what (but I will take out the changes to the stdlib as part of the PEP and make it a “MAY” suggestion). I’m also giving folks another chance on the Python API (like PEP 517) versus JSON-RPC for WSP as at least @pf_moore seemed taken aback by what that could mean, so I want to make sure people are making an informed decision here.

As a reminder:

Do note that I am recording people’s votes as it does matter if all the workflow tool authors go a certain way. I also consider the poll results advisory and not binding.

With that all out of the way …

What should I do with PEP 832?
  • Withdraw the PEP
  • .venv and .python-envs
  • .venv, .python-envs, and WSP over JSON-RPC
  • .venv, .python-envs, and WSP as a Python API
  • .venv and WSP over JSON-RPC
  • .venv and WSP as a Python API
0 voters

[EDIT: added “reminder” bullet list which reiterated things already said elsewhere that came up in private discussion with others.]

5 Likes