I wonder whether it will have a flat namespace that everyone competes over or whether the top-level keys will be user/project identifiers of some sort. I hope the latter.
PYX: The next step in Python packaging
11–20 of 479 posts
Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#12Pyx is just a registry, just like Pypi, or did I misunderstood it?
> pyx is also an instantiation of our strategy: our tools remain free, open source, and permissively licensed — forever.
Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#13Pyx is just a registry, just like Pypi, or did I misunderstood it?
To be precise: pyx isn't intended to be a public registry or a free service; it's something Astral will be selling. It'll support private packages and corporate use cases that are (reasonably IMO) beyond PyPI's scope.
(FD: I work on pyx.)
Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#14Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#15I've been burned too many times by embracing open source products like this. We've been fed promises like these before. They will inevitably get acquired. Years of documentation, issues, and pull requests will be deleted with little-to-no notice. An exclusively commercial replacement will materialize from the new company that is inexplicably missing the features you relied on in the first place.
Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#16Pyx is just a registry, just like Pypi, or did I misunderstood it?
Sounds like it. Also .. > pyx is also an instantiation of our strategy: our tools remain free, open source, and permissively licensed — forever.
> Beyond the product itself, pyx is also an instantiation of our strategy: our tools remain free, open source, and permissively licensed — forever. Nothing changes there. Instead, we'll offer paid, hosted services that represent the "natural next thing you need" when you're already using our tools: the Astral platform.
pyx itself is not a tool, it's a service.
Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#17I wonder whether it will have a flat namespace that everyone competes over or whether the top-level keys will be user/project identifiers of some sort. I hope the latter.
Fundamentally we still have the flat namespace of top level python imports, which is the same as the package name for ~95% of projects, so I'm not sure how they could really change that.
But you can if you want have a non-flat namespace for imports using PEP 420 – Implicit Namespace Packages, so all your different packages "company-foo", "company-bar", etc. can be installed into the "company" namespace and all just work.
Nothing stops an index from validating that wheels use the same name or namespace as their package names. Sdists with arbitrary backends would not be possible, but you could enforce what backends were allowed for certain users.
Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#18As I said a couple weeks ago, they're gonna have to cash out at some point. The move won't be around Uv -- it'll be a protected private PyPi or something. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44712558 Now what do we have here?
Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#19I've been burned too many times by embracing open source products like this. We've been fed promises like these before. They will inevitably get acquired. Years of documentation, issues, and pull requests will be deleted with little-to-no notice. An exclusively commercial replacement will materialize from the new company that is inexplicably missing the features you relied on in the first place.
> Beyond the product itself, pyx is also an instantiation of our strategy: our tools remain free, open source, and permissively licensed — forever. Nothing changes there. Instead, we'll offer paid, hosted services that represent the "natural next thing you need" when you're already using our tools: the Astral platform.
Basically, we're hoping to address this concern by building a separate sustainable commercial product rather than monetizing our open source tools.
Re: PYX: The next step in Python packaging
#20> Private registry
ouch.