From f75d300ed96582091ca39af747dbe228566f8c25 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kushal Das Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 09:04:15 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] PEP 582: Updates the rejected ideas list (#3002) Updates the rejected ideas list --- pep-0582.rst | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/pep-0582.rst b/pep-0582.rst index dc1c394a8..86f4d7042 100644 --- a/pep-0582.rst +++ b/pep-0582.rst @@ -333,6 +333,8 @@ Rejected Ideas * Additional features of virtual environments. This proposal is not a replacement for virtual environments, and such features are therefore out of scope. +* We will not scan any parent directory to find ``__pypackages__``. If we want to execute scripts inside of the ``~/bin/`` directory, then the ``__pypackages__`` directory must be inside of the ``~/bin/`` directory. Doing any such scan for ``__pypackages__`` (for the interpreter or a script) will have security implications and also increase startup time. + * Raise an error if unexpected files or directories are present in ``__pypackages__``. This is considered too strict, particularly as transitional approaches like ``pip install --prefix`` can create additional files in ``__pypackages__``. * Using a different ``sysconfig`` scheme, or a dedicated ``pypackages`` scheme. While this is attractive in theory, it makes transition harder, as there will be no readily-available way of installing to ``__pypackages__`` until tools implement explicit support. And while the PEP authors hope and assume that such support would be added, having the proposal dependent on such support in order to be usable seems like an unacceptable risk.