3 ms·
It's really not an awful idea in general, but might be for a user like you. I'm not sure if you read the article but it details the many various types of users
by philote 3y ago
It's really not an awful idea in general, but might be for a user like you. I'm not sure if you read the article but it details the many various types of users and why they may use Python projects and libraries. Having an executable available will make installing the tool much much easier for some users. And you can still have the source code and regular packages available for those that know how to handle it.
- crabbone 3y agoOP mistakes the problems Python users have with the actual problems Python packaging system has. The overwhelming majority of "pain" the author talks about is self-inflicted. The overwhelming majority of Python users are bottom-of-the-barrel worst programmers to walk the face of the Earth. Their problems come from just being really, really bad at what they are supposed to be good at. So, one complaint you could make is that Python packaging isn't very friendly to incompetent users... well, that's true, but I wouldn't care about that. Quite the contrary: I wouldn't mind it if things were more complex, but worked well, once you mastered them. Your idea of distributing a single binary is bad for all the reasons I described in the previous post. You just decided that it's not so bad because it helps users who suck to suck less... But I don't want a "solution" that would sacrifice many other desired properties to deal with my potential incompetence. I'd rather learn how to do things right than enjoy being stupid and have someone else cover for my stupidity.