-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
deprecate poetry self
commands
#7872
Conversation
Would this effectively deprecate the official installer as well? Since |
The installer is perfectly capable of updating an existing poetry installation, |
Okay, so would the workflow be to upgrade the officially installed Poetry that a user would go back to https://python-poetry.org/docs/#installing-with-the-official-installer, copy the command for their platform, and run it again? To me, this would move me to use Note, I'm not saying that (Slightly off topic) The bigger issue (not the Poetry dev's fault) is that Python really needs to bundle something like I've brought this up to the core team before |
pipx is a fine solution and the way that I install poetry myself. For users who want to do fancy things with plugins (which is not me) it would probably be a particularly good choice because For those wanting to avoid pipx for whatever reason, running the installer both to install or upgrade seems fine. There is no shortage of alternatives to |
One thing that removing
If we remove the ability to do this then does that remove the ability to add plugins unless you have installed poetry in the first place using And as such does that mean that if you want to install plugins then you'll need to not use the installer and |
Not sure if we should deprecate all
If you use the installer, you can still install plugins via pip as mentioned here.
see #8090 |
Poetry's current documentation states that In my opinion, removing this simple option for installing plugins would be a step backwards in the usability of the tool. I have the same use-case as @mjam03 and also use Google Artifact Registry for private repos. I don't have nearly enough context on the general issues with |
I second this |
Ok, I am going to wear my "maintainer" hat and make a decision on that. No. While I understand the |
fair enough - though
remains true... |
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
Of course I am not expecting this to be merged without some discussion! But I think it's a discussion that's worth having, so let's create a space in which to have it.
A thing that sometimes happens on this issue tracker is putting right users who have installed poetry itself in the project under management. Of course that goes wrong: among other things, running
poetry update
(or whatever) can cause packages to be updated while poetry itself is actively using them; if you get unlucky then poetry just won't work any more.But so far as I can see
poetry self
commands all are built on this exact mistake: thepoetry
binary is managing its own environment. And indeed there are reports from people who do things likepoetry self update
and see just the same sort of problem: #7610, #7819I don't understand how this can be expected to work, and I have no idea how it can be fixed.
What's more - perhaps this wasn't true a few years back - there are fine alternatives available, most obviously
pipx
based installations.I also think in general that
poetry
has a larger surface area than is good for the health of the project - see the state of the issue backlog - and thatpoetry self
is a relatively bug-rich part of the codebase, certainly compared to the value that it brings. So to my mind it's a great candidate for establishing that it is possible to remove code that is more burden than help.Opinions welcome...