Replying works fine now - previously the option was not shown although I was logged-in and refreshed the page. (did not change any adblock settings, I use uBlock Origin btw.)

Sorry for getting back a little late. The package I had issues with is as mentioned something I build/package myself from AUR called "sacad". (Should affect other packages as well, as I only have a very limited amount of AUR packages installed.)

That package might be a bad example though, as I also can't get it to manually compile.

it is a bad example, because it is not a parabola package - the packages a being collected so we can try to get them to build without pip

#3443 is tracking which applications are affected by pip's absence - if you know of any, plz add them to #3443

also, i asked to add it to #3443, not this one - one ticket per issue - this one was two issues already, "why no pip" and "why cant i add comments" - i changed the topic of this one to "why is python-pip no longer available?" - i would have wanted another ticket for "why cant i add comments"; but i found out why and fixed it - one of the permissions settings was wrong

I totally understand the reasoning behind removing pip, but I agree with Drag0nFly that it would be good to see a short news post to clarify the situation: why it's no longer available with Parabola and what people should do instead.

the reason there has been no announcement, is because nothing has been decided
yet - there really is nothing conclusive to announce - pip is not special - it
is one of many TPPMs which all need the same treatment - pip only happens to be
among those chosen for the initial experiment - it was chosen only because it
is one of the most popular, and so likely to elicit reactions from the
community such as this one - but to be rational about this, they all must be
treated the same at the same time

so far, the response has been underwhelming - it does not look like many people
want pip in the repos - as the most popular TPPM, it may be safe to assume that
people dont care about any of them; so maybe it is time to continue the
experiment and eject the others

in other words, before making any definitive statement about pip, i would first
want to treat all other TPPMs accordingly, and then the announcement would apply
to all of them with the same rationale - otherwise, this suggestion would
require dozens of similar announcements; and there would repeatedly be questions
that i do not want to answer, like: "why did you do this to my favorite TPPM
but not the others?"

presumably most people will care about only one of them; but i do not want to
single out any for special treatment; because really, no distro needs any of them,
and distro users should not want to use them - even if some distro users want these
things, it still makes no sense for any distro to distribute them

I agree with having these packages available system-wide. However, there are Python packages missing in Parabola which makes installing these via pip the only option.

The most recent version of pip now also prevents doing this directly – unless overridden – with:

╰─> To install Python packages system-wide, try 'pacman -S
python-xyz', where xyz is the package you are trying to
install.

bill-auger: is there a list of missing Python packages which is tracked somewhere? Currently "python-bitarray" is not available for some reason; I'm sure there are others.

there is no "most recent version of pip" - it is no longer available in parabola - are you referring to the arch package?

i dont believe that any packages are missing - there is no "python-bitarray" package in arch; so it is not "missing" from parabola - we have 'haskell-bitarray' though

if there are any desirable python packages which are not available in parabola, they can be requested - if a working PKGBUILD accompanies the packaging request, that would make it all the more easier to adopt

I am aware that it was removed as a package, that was the subject of this ticket. ;)

The message pointing to pacman for system-wide installs is something I haven't noticed until I upgraded pip (via itself) to 23.2.1.

Not sure what you mean by "not missing". It is referred to in the PKGBUILD, and available as a Python package (just apparently not in the Parabola/Arch repos).

==> Missing dependencies:
  -> python-bitarray
  -> python-cssselect
  -> python-mutagen
  -> python-pillow
  -> python-tqdm
  -> python-unidecode
==> Checking buildtime dependencies...
==> ERROR: Could not resolve all dependencies.

________________________________________________________
Executed in  777.86 millis    fish           external
   usr time  596.52 millis  696.00 micros  595.83 millis
   sys time  259.06 millis   74.00 micros  258.99 millis

~/a/sacad (master✔) [8]> sudo pacman -S python-bitarray
error: target not found: python-bitarray

If pip is no longer an option, and no "official" package exists in Arch - what is the proposed solution?

ok that is different - if some PKGBUILD published by parabola refers to a package that is not in the parabola repos, then it is indeed missing, or the PKGBUILD is incorrect - that would deserve its own bug report

if the PKGBUILD is not published by parabola, that would need a packaging request for both packages

I've created a new ticket for python-bitarray; #3513

Would be good to also have "sacad" (https://github.com/desbma/sacad/) which made me aware of this situation, although it should package with the added Python deps.