Ask HN: Why is Python package management still a dumpster fire?

You have to get these things right early-on, and get everyone on the same page. Once things start to get fragmented, once you have historical decisions that prevent you from improving certain aspects, etc, there's only so much you can do to after the fact to paper over the gaps.

Python's packaging story is rotten in its bones. I think at this point it's nearly impossible to fix (though many continue to try).

The way I see it, a solution would require:

- A cohesive, self-contained, easy to use, all-inclusive toolset, with a completely standardized manifest format for packages. And, for all that is holy, doesn't mess with the global environment so that we have to lie to it with virtual environments.

- That toolset would have to get overwhelming adoption by the community, to where it retroactively becomes The Python Package Manager (outside of legacy codebases, which would continue to languish). This would probably require endorsement by the Python developers, or for the tool to be so unassailably better that it's preferred without exception, or possibly both. Otherwise we'll continue to have: https://xkcd.com/927/

I want to emphasize that on the second point 50% adoption is not enough. 70% adoption is not enough. I'm talking 90%+ adoption for libraries and new projects; everything outside of it needs to be a rounding error, or we're still in fragmentation hell.

And then even in the best case- there would be a long tail for years to come of packages that haven't been ported to the new tool/manifest format, where you have to duck out to one of the other package managers to pull them in.

from Hacker News https://ift.tt/Pcqz1gR