[Biopython-dev] Should we recommend "pip install biopython"?

[Eric Talevich]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com>
wrote:

>
> Actually installing pip on older Pythons is a pain, so I'd like any
> wording to make it clear pip may not be installed, in which case
> the traditional "python setup.py ..." route is the best bet.
>

Sure. The Python community has been fairly clear for years that pip is the
way forward. As long as we're being good citizens, recommending Python 3.5
and so on, we should suggest a sane setup as the default one for
Biopython's users.

I haven't used Windows in about a decade, but on Linux in recent years pip
has always been available to me. I can vouch for conda, too; whatever the
usual problems are on Windows, I think conda is meant to fix/avoid them.

-Eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython-dev/attachments/20151027/9252abf9/attachment.html>