Implement pipfile support

[stsewd]

Based on #4740

Implemented following the schema on #4782, I tested it locally with some projects, still need to test with more, but the internet gods aren't happy with me right now

[agjohnson]

I've reset the base to make this reviewable. #4740 is a very large PR and is difficult to review at this point. We'll reset the base once #4740 is merged.

[agjohnson]

Holding off on review for now, this needs some tests still. If the underlying PR has calmed down, feel free to continue here.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #4783 into master will decrease coverage by 1.86%.
The diff coverage is 12.9%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4783      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage    78.6%   76.73%   -1.87%     
==========================================
  Files         167      159       -8     
  Lines       10233    10034     -199     
  Branches     1286     1263      -23     
==========================================
- Hits         8044     7700     -344     
- Misses       1859     1998     +139     
- Partials      330      336       +6

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
readthedocs/config/config.py	95.86% <0%> (-2.95%)	⬇️
readthedocs/config/models.py	100% <100%> (ø)	⬆️
readthedocs/doc_builder/python_environments.py	78.44% <14.28%> (-5.77%)	⬇️
readthedocs/search/utils.py	0% <0%> (-53.66%)	⬇️
readthedocs/search/parse_json.py	57.14% <0%> (-11.52%)	⬇️
readthedocs/restapi/urls.py	80% <0%> (-9.66%)	⬇️
readthedocs/restapi/utils.py	90.99% <0%> (-9.01%)	⬇️
readthedocs/core/utils/tasks/permission_checks.py	28.57% <0%> (-8.93%)	⬇️
readthedocs/core/utils/__init__.py	74.73% <0%> (-8.41%)	⬇️
readthedocs/core/views/__init__.py	71.01% <0%> (-8.24%)	⬇️
... and 158 more

[humitos]

What's the status of this? Is it just waiting for review and QA?

[stsewd]

Yeah, review mostly. There some parts where I want other opinions, like how to put custom paths (not root). I'm using a env variable right now, but with sphinx we just change the cwd, this feels like hiding info to the user, but feels better than showing the env variable in the command. And pipenv doesn't have something like --file=

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[RohanNagar]

Any updates? This shouldn't be marked as stale.

[stsewd]

@RohanNagar yes, this is still valid, but we are going to prioritize other work before. Like #1083.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[jmsmkn]

Thank you for the excellent service that rtd provides! It's invaluable to us and our users. Is there anything that I can do to help get this merged? I've not contributed here before but I have experience with Django and Pipenv.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[ericholscher]

I've seen some complaints that pipenv/pipfile don't seem to be actively maintained or pushing forward currently. I think I might be +1 on closing this until we see it being adopted as an official standard. I really don't want to be supporting experimental, slow package installation.

[stsewd]

I also think that pipenv should adopt https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0517/, like poetry did, that way installing the project with pip should be enough

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[humitos]

I've seen some complaints that pipenv/pipfile don't seem to be actively maintained or pushing forward currently

At the beginning of this year, they opened this issue pypa/pipenv#4130

---

I'm closing this PR for now. It's a pity that we may lose all the work and time involved here, but it seems it's for the best. We can revisit in the future if we feel it's needed.

On the other hand, I think this use case could be handled by advanced users by overriding the build.jobs.install proposed in #8190 (or similar) instead of building this at Read the Docs core.

[astrojuanlu]

On the topic of Pipenv being still the officially recommended tool, I opened this issue pypa/packaging.python.org#912