Even if that set of tools is kinda crappy (Glances at go), it's just so nice to not have all the bikeshedding and just get on with it.
E.g. more flexible than Cargo in that you could have a large codebase with two different versions of a dependency isolated to their compile units allowing you to gradually adopt a breaking change dependency in a large code base. I was kinda bowled over with that feature (the isolation part is key).
For python I’m finding poetry much more ergonomic than pipenv, it’s not just the speed difference it’s the convenience of one tool which aligns with what you’re saying although the existence of poetry doesn’t delete historical aberrations in Python’s long history.
What we saw with npm was the entire community iterating towards a feature set and everyone reaping the benefits automatically with npm updates. package-lock.json is a good example of this.
Leiningen is the weird one where people did actually settle fairly well around an unofficial solution in the absence of an official one. I think the norm with languages that forego official tooling is closer to what we've seen in Python.
If you're curious, the email threads about Conda and defining wheels are interesting.
[1]: https://github.com/pypa/pipenv
But with or without a BDFL, one packaging tool to rule them all is a pretty tall order. The needs of a package like scipy, which incorporates C & Fortran code, are pretty different from something like requests. And different communities using Python have their own entrenched tools and techniques. It takes more than someone saying "Foo is officially blessed" to shift that, even if everyone respects the person saying that.
Also, yes, Guido and many other early contributers have been been active for 30ish years.
And NumPy/Scipy/Pandas exist (and are successful) because...? /s
The js tooling is particularly immature, e.g. fake packages along with typo squatting is rife. Compare with boring old maven where that’s not been an issue in >10 years at this point.
Personally I much prefer pip over npm, it feels much more polished.
python is a mature, old, software system. three times older than go or rust. way older than zig. these modern languages have learned from the field as a whole and implemented tools that people are taking for granted nowadays.
as with any mature software system, people & companies have established their preferred ways of doing things. it's going to be hard to have the language council dictate ways of doing things.
i would recommend going simple and using the standard set of modules until poetry or whatever gets into it.
Strongly disagree. There are so many footguns with low-level tools like pip that I can't recommend it to anybody but an expert (but an expert doesn't need my recommendation anyway).