Enable output of script line for 'run' in verbose mode

[refack]

The issue

There is no simple way to see the what is the command line that's used for pipenv run

The fix

Output the command line to the log as info, so it's output when run in verbose mode.

The checklist

• Associated issue
• A news fragment in the news/ directory to describe this fix with the extension .bugfix, .feature, .behavior, .doc. .vendor. or .trivial (this will appear in the release changelog). Use semantic line breaks and name the file after the issue number or the PR #.

Seeking early feedback.

[frostming]

This logger is not explicitly called in any other place of this file. To keep consistency, I recommend

if environments.is_verbose():
    click.echo("Run: {!0r}".format(cmd_string), err=True)

[refack]

Sure.

[techalchemy]

(as a sidenote, logging using a logger implementation isn't a great practice, especially in our case -- we parse the output that goes to stdout in many cases)

[jxltom]

➜  abc pipenv --verbose run pip list 
Run: pip list
Package    Version
---------- -------
pip        18.1   
setuptools 40.6.2 
wheel      0.32.3 

Here is the example output making easier to review

[techalchemy]

Made one small change request

Also can you please include a news fragment in the news/ directory which is named after either the corresponding issue if applicable or after the PR number, i.e. news/3348.feature.rst with a short description, e.g.

Added support for ``--verbose`` output to ``pipenv run``.

Thanks!

[refack]

Another output example
For this Pipfile:

[scripts]
lint = "flake8 . --exclude=.venv --count --show-source --statistics --select=E901,E999,F821,F822,F823"

Console:

DEV D:\code\4node\gyp>pipenv -v run lint
$ flake8 . --exclude=.venv --count --show-source --statistics --select=E901,E999,F821,F822,F823
0

DEV D:\code\4node\gyp>

[refack]

can you please include a news fragment in the news/

Done, PTAL.

BTW: That's very crufty, could it be extracted from the commit log? Point me to the tools I'll give it a try :)

[techalchemy]

It's a pretty common changelog approach, we have a lot of commits and extracting changelogs from commit logs is not really a reasonable approach