4 ms·

Neat and it doesn’t fall into the same trap as many others trying to build similar tools in python itself by being built with rust there’s no bootstrapping issu

Neat and it doesn’t fall into the same trap as many others trying to build similar tools in python itself by being built with rust there’s no bootstrapping issues with managing the python environment the tool to manage python environments needs. However it’s very opinionated and ignores several things I like to have control over (and have needed to use in the past) and most importantly I want to be able to compile my own python binary and pyenv makes it pretty painless. So while I’m impressed and think it looks good it’s a 100% no for me just because I have on multiple occasions had to compile ahead for testing, or apply a tiny patch python to build on an unsupported os such as a too old or new macOS… I’m not the target audience but unfortunately I suspect sue to how well known he is, this will lead to adoption and popularity and while I think this tool is good for him and other people I don’t think python needs more opinionated management tool projects getting wildly popular… I don’t want to see a repeat of the pipenv saga

the_mitsuhiko 3y ago
Author here. > However it’s very opinionated and ignores several things I like to have control over (and have needed to use in the past) and most importantly I want to be able to compile my own python binary and pyenv makes it pretty painless. For what it's worth I do agree with this, and in fact before I published this to GitHub, rye was capable of doing that. I somewhat intentionally stripped it down a bit to better explain and showcase what I wish that experience looked like. In an ideal world, we would not have to use custom Python installations because a tool like rye could automatically fetch it. However there are always cases where you need (eg: local python builds for development etc.) so I will definitely want to bring this back. The reason I never put this on GitHub is really that I do not want to build the next thing that just splits the ecosystem apart. But as of recent, there have been some developments that make me somewhat optimistic that there is a chance, Python packaging could be fixed once and for all, and this is supposed to be a bit of a teaser of what could be.
- santiagobasulto 3y ago
  Armin, thanks for rye and all you've done throughout the years. I'm curious, what are these developments you've mentioned that make you optimistic?
  - the_mitsuhiko 3y ago
    I think the general packaging situation has sufficiently improved so that the delta to a good outcome is quite narrow. This is from both the adoption of pyproject.toml and the build ecosystem around it as well as a desire towards portable python executables. (See also the existence of PEP 711)

the_mitsuhiko 3y ago

Author here. > However it’s very opinionated and ignores several things I like to have control over (and have needed to use in the past) and most importantly I want to be able to compile my own python binary and pyenv makes it pretty painless. For what it's worth I do agree with this, and in fact before I published this to GitHub, rye was capable of doing that. I somewhat intentionally stripped it down a bit to better explain and showcase what I wish that experience looked like. In an ideal world, we would not have to use custom Python installations because a tool like rye could automatically fetch it. However there are always cases where you need (eg: local python builds for development etc.) so I will definitely want to bring this back. The reason I never put this on GitHub is really that I do not want to build the next thing that just splits the ecosystem apart. But as of recent, there have been some developments that make me somewhat optimistic that there is a chance, Python packaging could be fixed once and for all, and this is supposed to be a bit of a teaser of what could be.

santiagobasulto 3y ago
Armin, thanks for rye and all you've done throughout the years. I'm curious, what are these developments you've mentioned that make you optimistic?
- the_mitsuhiko 3y ago
  I think the general packaging situation has sufficiently improved so that the delta to a good outcome is quite narrow. This is from both the adoption of pyproject.toml and the build ecosystem around it as well as a desire towards portable python executables. (See also the existence of PEP 711)