You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When I run pip, what I most want to see is "What is pip doing?"
Unfortunately, the current choices seem to be:
Run pip install ..., which generates many pages of useless "Requirement already satisfied" messages
Run pip install -q ..., which generates nothing, not even messages about what is being installed
Describe the solution you'd like
I'd like a pip option that prints out the actions pip is actually doing, and doesn't print out things it isn't doing.
Ideally, this would be the meaning of -q, and the current behaviour for -q would be enabled with -qq. But for backward compatibility, it would be acceptable to have a new option that simply suppresses all the "Requirement already satisfied" messages.
It would be acceptable to suppress all the "Requirement already satisfied" messages, or to replace them all with a single summary message that lists all the already-satisfied requirements on one line. What I don't want is so many pages of output that it's hard to find the actions actually taken buried among output that I don't care about.
Alternative Solutions
pip help only lists -q as a way to control the amount of output; I tried that and it didn't do what I'd like it to do.
Additional context
That's it! I can't think of any more details — hoping this is as straightforward a feature request as it seems to me.
Out of need I just searched for exactly this feature request and I am glad it exists.
By the way this, or something very similar, had also been asked for in 2014 in #1537 however back then a decision was made that adding a specific option would not be worth it.
I second @zestyping that this feature could indeed be very useful. People seem to just kinda cope with finding the messages about actual changes amongst all the "requirement already satisfied" messages. I think an extra option could save people quite some time. It might be relatively easy to implement as well.
I don’t think it’s a good idea to hide Requirement already satisfied lines by default (they do convey important information), but making -q “not actually quiet” would be a big breaking change and not so viable either. The only technically possible solution would be to add a new option, which, as you already noticed, is not worth it.
This needs a more inventive or fundamental rstructuring of logging to be made possible. Perhaps if (when) we implement better “log collapsing” with Rich, the amount of information should be less of a problem.
In the mean time, closing this since there is no really any actionables for this particular feature request. Rich status bar implementation is tracked in #10461.
What's the problem this feature will solve?
When I run
pip
, what I most want to see is "What is pip doing?"Unfortunately, the current choices seem to be:
pip install ...
, which generates many pages of useless "Requirement already satisfied" messagespip install -q ...
, which generates nothing, not even messages about what is being installedDescribe the solution you'd like
I'd like a
pip
option that prints out the actionspip
is actually doing, and doesn't print out things it isn't doing.Ideally, this would be the meaning of
-q
, and the current behaviour for-q
would be enabled with-qq
. But for backward compatibility, it would be acceptable to have a new option that simply suppresses all the "Requirement already satisfied" messages.It would be acceptable to suppress all the "Requirement already satisfied" messages, or to replace them all with a single summary message that lists all the already-satisfied requirements on one line. What I don't want is so many pages of output that it's hard to find the actions actually taken buried among output that I don't care about.
Alternative Solutions
pip help
only lists-q
as a way to control the amount of output; I tried that and it didn't do what I'd like it to do.Additional context
That's it! I can't think of any more details — hoping this is as straightforward a feature request as it seems to me.
Code of Conduct
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: