3 ms·
> Python packaging needs to better serve the needs of python developers, not those of sysadmins. Please substitute s/sysadmins/users/, and realise your develop
by rollcat 5y ago
> Python packaging needs to better serve the needs of python developers, not those of sysadmins.
Please substitute s/sysadmins/users/, and realise your developers are users too.
I've been doing Python for almost 15 years; and I'm getting really fed up with some things. Packaging is a mess. Distribution is a mess (for servers/IoT - Docker saves the day; for desktop - I feel like giving up). Managing the installations is a mess; upgrades can be impossible - I'm hard-stuck on Python3.6 on one project!
I find myself rewriting many smaller tools in Go or Rust, just because I can upgrade the toolchain at any time, and/or ship a static binary. But Rust has a very high barrier to entry, and Go tends to be simplistic.
I'd fully jump ship today, but Python has just too much momentum behind it.
- ShamelessC 5y agoI agree to some extent, but I believe they were mostly trying to convey that much of the work is done by volunteers who are largely only motivated/have the resources to test a small subset of potential deployment scenarios. Those contributions are still valuable and contributors themselves don't owe you anything. The best way to fix this issue would be to get involved (or switch languages as you suggested, that's fine too).