Confusion about easy_install vs pip

[dstufft]

There is confusion about if users should be using easy_install or if they should be using pip. A lot of documentation exists currently that points in one direction or the other with varying levels of snark involved. How best can we guide users to "one way to do it"?

[ncoghlan]

Resolving this is the aim of the "Quick Recommendations" section of the packaging guide:

https://python-packaging-user-guide.readthedocs.org/en/latest/current.html

Also see https://bitbucket.org/pypa/python-packaging-user-guide/pull-request/10/split-the-quick-recommendations-into

[daenney]

I think the last few years a lot of documentation and blog posts mention both easy_install and pip but recommended pip. As of late I've seen less and less and less of easy_install. It would also help if downstreams like Linux distributions and the homebrew/macports projects would stop shipping easy_install altogether.

[hickford]

The docs at https://pythonhosted.org/setuptools/easy_install.html should at least mention Pip I think

[brainwane]

Now that packaging.python.org is the official packaging documentation site and officially recommends pip, can we close this issue?

[ncoghlan]

Aye, we clearly recommend pip, and https://packaging.python.org/discussions/pip-vs-easy-install/ discusses the trade-offs between them.

pypa/setuptools#917 is an open setuptools issue discussing the various barriers to deprecating easy_install and switching setuptools entirely over to relying on pip.

So I don't think there's any further ecosystem level questions here - it's just an internal question for the setuptools devs as to how they want to handle this in their documentation and code.