Hello, and thanks for your contribution!

I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept this contribution by verifying everyone involved has signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).

CLA Missing

Our records indicate the following people have not signed the CLA:

@cmhzc

For legal reasons we need all the people listed to sign the CLA before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

If you have recently signed the CLA, please wait at least one business day
before our records are updated.

You can check yourself to see if the CLA has been received.

Thanks again for the contribution, we look forward to reviewing it!

From the abstract of PEP 405 (emphasis added):

Each virtual environment has its own Python binary (allowing creation of environments with various Python versions) and can have its own independent set of installed Python packages in its site directories, but shares the standard library with the base installed Python.

By default, a venv is isolated from system site-packages, not from the standard library.

From the abstract of PEP 405 (emphasis added):

Each virtual environment has its own Python binary (allowing creation of environments with various Python versions) and can have its own independent set of installed Python packages in its site directories, but shares the standard library with the base installed Python.

By default, a venv is isolated from system site-packages, not from the standard library.

The phrase I quoted is from the original tutorial, isn't it implying the virtual environment has its own standard lib?

That's a fair point -- it does seem to imply it has its own copy of the standard library. I misunderstood what you were saying to mean that it didn't have access to the standard library.

It also doesn't necessarily create a copy of the Python interpreter, but rather a symlink to the Python interpreter if it can, but if not, then a copy. I'm not sure if that detail is worth clarifying though.

That's a fair point -- it does seem to imply it has its own copy of the standard library. I misunderstood what you were saying to mean that it didn't have access to the standard library.

It also doesn't necessarily create a copy of the Python interpreter, but rather a symlink to the Python interpreter if it can, but if not, then a copy. I'm not sure if that detail is worth clarifying though.

Yeah, I think the default behavior is to create a symbolic link if it can, but I'm not sure if that could be done on Windows. Since
a copy could be made with a --copies option, I didn't make any change to this either.

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

I have made the requested changes; please review again.
I dropped the unneeded commits from the commits history.

Thanks for making the requested changes!

@vsajip: please review the changes made to this pull request.