Netflix?

This is true but not completely. You will only get pip when you install the binary downloaded from python.org. On osx, people use brew, on Debian, they use apt. It is most likely only Windows people will download those binaries but actually they use Anaconda, WinPython instead

It's still very easy to install. And as of Python 3.4 it's even easier since you can 'python -m ensurepip'.

Why are the packages removing pip?

Anaconda provides its own separate package-management world, so it makes sense that it doesn't include pip. But you can always still install it.

I'm actually getting tired of package managers reinventing the wheel (literally) every time they want to install something.

In production when I deploy a django app, now I might have two libraries in different places in my system. One from the OS, and one from the pip dependency.

Used my python package dwc(https://github.com/hvnsweeting/dwc)

  dwc */ | sort -n | head
    494: examples/
    846: docs/
   1268: mal/
   1464: perl6/
   1483: coffee/
   1509: io/
   1534: racket/
   1571: ocaml/
   1579: es6/
   1621: factor/

Edit1: for better command

Edit2: for formatting

The problem with that command is that it also counts the Makefile, Dockerfile and other supporting files. It also counts every implementation step (so lots of repeats in the LOC). However, each implementation does have a "stats" rule. So the following command at the top-level can be used to a get a nice summary:

    for i in $(make print-IMPLS); do \
      s=$(make stats^$i | grep total); \
      printf "%-9s %s\n" "$i" "$s"; \
    done | sort -n -k2

I made a gist with the current results: https://gist.github.com/kanaka/fdef20f5d0c2e04b97d9106b2f2f2...