3 ms·
There's nothing inherently wrong with having options. This is the classic trade-off between convention and configuration. You can prefer a tech stack that val
by rmbyrro 2y ago
There's nothing inherently wrong with having options.
This is the classic trade-off between convention and configuration.
You can prefer a tech stack that values convention over configuration, while others prefer the opposite.
This is totally fine.
- saghm 2y agoI don't disagree with your premise, but I'd argue that's not what's happening here. My perception that Python doesn't have half a dozen different tools for making package management better because the community values choice and prefers it to having a default option that does everything they want, it's that the default one isn't good enough for what people seem to want, and the community is trying to make up for that.
- darkteflon 2y agopyproject.toml + rye/uv is excellent.
- rmbyrro 2y agoIf I had to bet, at least half Python projects use the standard packaging. Python applications vary widly. Having a single standard option for packaging that is good enough for all isn't the core language goal.