I didn't take the survey because I've never packaged anything for PyPI, but I wish all of the package managers would have an option for domain validated namespaces. If I own example.com, I should be able to have 'pypi.org/example.com/package'. The domain can be tied back to my (domain verified) GitHub profile and it opens up the possibility of using something like 'example.com/.well-known/pypi/' for self-managed sign…
Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
31–40 of 193 posts
Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#32I wish there is some package manager in middle of conda and pip. Conda is too strict and often get stuck in SAT solving. pip doesn't even ask when reinstalling a version currently being used. Edit: Typo: reinstalling a version of package currently being used
Try poetry. It wraps pip and fixes a lot of its issues
Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#33I just wish that PyPI would enforce binary wheels going forward (at least for linux x64/arm64 for people who use Docker, but ideally for all common platforms). They already supply the cibuildwheel tool to automate their builds, so it shouldn't be that hard for library developers... Software developers shouldn't need to figure out what build-time dependencies their libraries need...
I haven't had too much trouble with packages missing binary wheels lately. Occasionally Pip doesn't find them, which looks the same as if the binary wheel were missing entirely (looking at you, Anaconda-- update your Pip already), but they're usually there. But I'm usually on Windows if I need binary wheels; maybe the coverage is a bit different on Linux.
Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#34The survey is at https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/M5XKQCT .
Seems more oriented to (potential) contributors than end users of the packaging system. Who cares about mission statements and inclusivity, secure funding and pay developers to make the tools.
Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
> pip doesn't even ask when reinstalling a version currently being used. Just as an explanation: a "version" in Python packaging can come from one of many potential distributions, including a local distribution (such as a path on disk) that might different from a canonical released distribution on PyPI. Having `pip install ...` always re-install based on its candidate selection rules is generally good (IMO), since an…
I meant this for dependency not the package I am installing.
Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#36I didn't take the survey because I've never packaged anything for PyPI, but I wish all of the package managers would have an option for domain validated namespaces. If I own example.com, I should be able to have 'pypi.org/example.com/package'. The domain can be tied back to my (domain verified) GitHub profile and it opens up the possibility of using something like 'example.com/.well-known/pypi/' for self-managed sign…
That's a really interesting idea, but I worry about what happens when a domain name expires and is re-registered (potentially even maliciously) by someone else.
I don't know if registries would play ball with something like that, but it would be useful and should probably exist anyway. I would even argue that once a domain rolls through grace, redemption, etc. and gets dropped / re-registered, that should invalidate it as an account recovery method everywhere it's in use.
There's a bit of complexity when it comes to the actual validation because of stuff like that. I think you'd need buy in from at least one large company that could do the actual verification and attest to interested parties via something like OAuth. Think along the lines of "verify your domain by logging in with GitHub" and at GitHub an organization owner that's validated their domain would be allowed to grant OAuth permission to read the verified domain name.
Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#37I’ve been tinkering with stable diffusion lately and this has been a rude introduction to python. Coming from .net (nuget) and JavaScript (npm), it’s baffling that there isn’t an established solution for python. It looks to me like people are trying, but different libraries use different techniques. To a newcomer this is confusing.
Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#38Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a really interesting idea, but I worry about what happens when a domain name expires and is re-registered (potentially even maliciously) by someone else.
I think you'd probably need some buy in from the domain registries and ICANN to make it really solid. Ideally, domains would have something similar to public certificate transparency logs where domain expirations would be recorded. I even think it would be reasonable to log registrant changes (legal registrant, not contact info). In both cases, it wouldn't need to include any identifiable info, just a simple expired/…
Of course there are going to be complexities involving key-rollover and migrating to a different domain, but a sufficiently intelligent Sigstore client could handle the various messages and cryptographic proofs needed to secure that. The hard part is how to issue a new key if you lose the old one, since that probably requires social vouching and a reputation system.
Re: Pypi.org is running a survey on the state of Python packaging
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try poetry. It wraps pip and fixes a lot of its issues
Seconding Poetry. IMO it should have been the standard package manager - it just works (TM)