@mhinz
This code does not handle using a host var properly: python_exe might be empty (e.g. because "check_bin" rejects it, #11047), and then this code will use it as-is (without extra checks being done for python_exe), resulting in a false positive.

This could be fixed by using provider#pythonx#CheckForModule(exe, a:module, a:major_version) directly when "python_exe" comes via the host var. (but it needs to be re-retrieved from there then; likely a helper var might be usedful, since the from-host-var-check is done several times)

Yeah, please go for it. You seem to be more into that code right now. :)

Maybe this whole help-with-pip-upgrade check should be removed?

At least it should maybe also use "python -m pip" style instead of "pip", especially when it comes to issues it tries to report, where pip in PATH might be different from python.

Well, we certainly won't need that check forever, but we added it because a lot of people had that issue when neovim was renamed to pynvim: https://github.com/neovim/neovim/wiki/Following-HEAD#20181118

It's up to @justinmk to decide when to remove it again. :]

As for pip vs. python -m pip: I don't even know the effective difference without looking it up, so.. yeah, I'd rather care about the Ruby side.

At least it should maybe also use "python -m pip" style instead of "pip",

+1

@justinmk
Cool.
But given that the upgrade migration period is over by now already, do you think we should rather drop this check, instead of fixing it for two different issues?
(it also simplifies code!)

Is it over? Some people still use nvim 0.1.7, this stuff takes years.

I've meant the transition to the new Python/pip package name.

Yes, my point is that it's likely there are still many people who haven't upgraded their python packages.