With setuptools, I just make setup.py and run pip install inside the root directory. If I have wheel, pip builds a wheel for my package.
Sorry, but I don't want to learn yet another packaging meta-language when plain Python worked fine for decades. Python already tried with setup.cfg ini files and people rejected it. Why would pyproject.toml be any better?
Why not improve setuptools instead? That is what sorting out packaging means. Stop copying other languages and focus on Python. Core devs took typing syntax, pattern matching and packaging from Rust and bolted it all on Python like it fits.
Well, it does not fit. Stick to your own.
Since build is semi-official Python project, I will use it instead of Poetry. We can no longer rely on setup.py, it seems.
Thanks.
Installation is a mess, and official recommendation of "copying a powershell line" was already a red flag. Now I can't remove it.
Poetry is a convoluted, insecure mess. Please avoid it and use official PyPi recommendations.
None of the things you mentioned were invented by Rust.
I converted some projects to pyproject.toml (the new standard for defining a project) and between it and the Poetry build/packaging tool it's pretty much solved the packaging nightmare.
There is now a branch of CPython that removes the GIL with significantly better performance in some benchmarks. There is active discussion on the mailing lists about how to get it into mainline.