3 ms·
As a pretty minor note, it's not that we _needed_ a two letter name. We considered hundreds of names and it really came down to what was available on PyPI (beca
by zanie 2y ago
As a pretty minor note, it's not that we _needed_ a two letter name. We considered hundreds of names and it really came down to what was available on PyPI (because it was table stakes that it could be installed from there). We are aware of libuv — it's used in Python too. However, it's a totally different domain and the name conflict isn't really a problem for our users.
Frankly, I'm just happy we didn't land on yet another packaging acronym or snake species :)
- wakawaka28 2y ago>However, it's a totally different domain and the name conflict isn't really a problem for our users. This is a poor rationalization for violating norms in open source software. No package manager needs to have a name conflict with a popular package or any package for that matter.