Add first rough pass at fixing #28

[tswicegood]

Add in support for doing source activate inside a directory with an environment.yml file and having it pick up that environment and activate it.

Testing

In order to test this branch, you have to install conda from this branch: conda/conda#1013. From within a checkout of that branch, run:

python setup.py develop

Tasks

• Add source activate support on *nix systems
• Handle situation where an environment has not been created
• Add activate support on Windows
• Verify all test_activate scripts in conda still pass
• Document usage

[tswicegood]

Addresses #28.

[srossross]

What happens when the user has not run conda env create yet?

[tswicegood]

Right now, it would fail with the unable to find environment message. It would be a better UI to display an error message stating that the user needs to run conda env create first. Another option would be to simply create it. I'm less inclined to do that without a configuration value. Maybe add auto_create_env?

[tswicegood]

@srossross actually -- it's worse than that. Conda exits with a message that no environment was specified if it doesn't exist.

[damianavila]

The idea sound interesting for me... I would also want some kind of functionality to list several environments in the yml file... and open several instances (consoles) with all the envs listed. My use case: working on Bokeh and IPython development and stable version in py3 and py2, so sometimes I would like to specify:

• py34stable, stable for Bokeh and IPython
• py34devel, devel for Bokeh and IPython in py3
• py27devel, devel for Bokeh and IPython in py2 (I could achieve py2 with a kernel pointing to the py2 env - I did that - but still I have the py3 IPython notebook server machinery, so it is a kind of Frankenstein, and could be a source of a hidden bug).

In any case, besides my crazy "request", I see value on specifying just one environment in the yml file.

[tswicegood]

@damianavila that's actually a really good idea. Would you mind opening up a new issue with your use-case so I can track that as a separate feature?

[damianavila]

Yep... done in #35 😉
Thanks.

[malev]

I don't think we need this anymore