Why use pip over easy_install?
A tweet reads:
Don't use easy_install, unless you like stabbing yourself in the face. Use pip.
Why use pip over easy_install? Doesn't the fault lie with PyPI and package authors mostly? If an author uploads crap source tarball (eg: missing files, no setup.py) to PyPI, then both pip and easy_install will fail. Other than cosmetic differences, why do Python people (like in the above tweet) seem to strongly favor pip over easy_install?
(Let's assume that we're talking about easy_install from the Distribute package, that is maintained by the community)
Answer
From Ian Bicking's own introduction to pip:
pip was originally written to improve on easy_install in the following ways
- All packages are downloaded before installation. Partially-completed installation doesn’t occur as a result.
- Care is taken to present useful output on the console.
- The reasons for actions are kept track of. For instance, if a package is being installed, pip keeps track of why that package was required.
- Error messages should be useful.
- The code is relatively concise and cohesive, making it easier to use programmatically.
- Packages don’t have to be installed as egg archives, they can be installed flat (while keeping the egg metadata).
- Native support for other version control systems (Git, Mercurial and Bazaar)
- Uninstallation of packages.
- Simple to define fixed sets of requirements and reliably reproduce a set of packages.