Live data from Hacker News

Current State of Python Packaging

stefanoborini.com

11–20 of 77 posts

Re: Current State of Python Packaging

#11
post #4

I get mad at the Haskell tools I use every day, and then I remember that nobody else is really in better shape.

Rust's Cargo is incredibly well thought-out and will make you despise everything else.

We are making a Cargo-like build toolchain for C/C++, if anyone is interested: https://build2.org

Re: Current State of Python Packaging

#13
I have a PHP Yii2 web project basically using composer (something like pip for Python) that the old project maintainer chose not to use a specific version for dependencies.

I am stunned when I do composer update, because it basically updates every dependencies.

When I asked one of the seniors, he said yea, I have to check every single part of the website and make sure it doesn't break.

I don't know anymore.

Re: Current State of Python Packaging

#14
post #7
post #3

Never head of poetry before. Looks very nice. Thanks for sharing.

Me either. Of course, now the last four Python packaging systems are obsolete. ("What about eggs? easy install? .egg-info directories? Forget them. They are legacy.") The consistent problem with all these systems is that when (not if) an install fails, figuring out what to do is very difficult.

pip, virtualenv, setup.py using setuptools, and twine if you need to publish to PyPI, are all pretty old and well-established, and are all still a fine way to do python development.

Re: Current State of Python Packaging

#15
I never heard of poetry before and normally use pipenv.

The author states that poetry is more popular than pipenv, is that true?

I did a quick comparison:

https://github.com/sdispater/poetry watchers: 77 stars: 4,690 forks: 318

https://github.com/pypa/pipenv watchers: 348 stars: 17,207 forks: 1,268

I don't know if the authors statement 'Most people seem to prefer Poetry.' is true.

Re: Current State of Python Packaging

#16

I get mad at the Haskell tools I use every day, and then I remember that nobody else is really in better shape.

This. I still use pip, venv and setup tools and I've packaged everything from third party dlls given by a supplier to my flask applications with html and everything.

I keep seeing pipenv and poetry and wonder how all these came about? Is it because people come from other languages and want to do this the way they did it in those?

Re: Current State of Python Packaging

#17
post #15

I never heard of poetry before and normally use pipenv. The author states that poetry is more popular than pipenv, is that true? I did a quick comparison: https://github.com/sdispater/poetry watchers: 77 stars: 4,690 forks: 318 https://github.com/pypa/pipenv watchers: 348 stars: 17,207 forks: 1,268 I don't know if the authors statement 'Most people seem to prefer Poetry.' is true.

Anecdote, but everyone I personally know in the Python-sphere hates pipenv (and the creator) for various reasons. On another forums community I’m a member of the recommended tool for python packaging is poetry.

Re: Current State of Python Packaging

#18
post #5
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust's Cargo is incredibly well thought-out and will make you despise everything else.

From the little development I have done in Rust, I have to agree. On the other hand, I’ve been working with react-Native and typescript recently, and it’s a constant mess. Every invocation of yarn leaves at least a couple of warning messages about things that are out of my control. Installing packages is slow and at least every few days I have to wipe out node_modules and nuke any iOS build folders in order to get it…

NPM claims to have taken the lead from Yarn in terms of install speed in the latest versions. Still, I prefer Yarn because NPM has such a history of suckage.

Meanwhile, the former CTO of NPM released a new (alpha) package management system last week at JSConfEU (the conference where NodeJS was first announced); see https://github.com/entropic-dev/entropic/blob/master/docs/RE...

Post reply on HN