3 ms·
I guess what Python needs to do is to crown one solution as the official, and then start imposing on PyPA packages to convert before a deadline or exclude. The
by gkya 8y ago
I guess what Python needs to do is to crown one solution as the official, and then start imposing on PyPA packages to convert before a deadline or exclude. Then they can move the non-compliant packages to a legacy archive, and build on the one solution that the community chose, say in a poll. Granted I've only ever interacted pip and virtualenv and though it was simple; but looking at this, things don't have to be this complex.
- pwang 8y agoThe heart of the problem is that different people are doing different things with Python, and nobody wants to pay cognitive load for what they don't want to use. The packagers and package tool makers of the world inherit ALL of the technical debt from ALL of the upstream software devs. They're either the liver or the colon. An upstream dev decided to not document which compiler they use during dev time? That's now your problem. A compiler maker (GNU, MSFT, etc.) decides to change how they distribute the C runtime? Congrats, now it's your packaging system's job to know how to differentiate between Windows 7 and Windows 10 running particular versions of Visual Studio. Nobody wants a "single simple unified solution" for packaging more than the packaging tool makers and distro vendors. Believe me. But it's not going to happen until software devs become take more responsibility for what they build upstream, and how they build it.
- oblio 8y agoPypi and Python devs themselves could start doing the curation. The package just isn't accepted into the repo if it doesn't follow X, Y, Z guidelines. Python is big and important enough that it needs these kinds of quality assurances. Punting on them is as bad as compromising on language design decisions.