News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Litecli: CLI for SQLite Databases with auto-completion an... by saghm on Tuesday September 10, 2024 @10:02AM (#41500859)
The fact that there are already multiple comments with different tools recommended for how to easily deal with Python packages is a perfect example of why people like the parent commenter don't want to deal with Python in the first place. I'm sure that "just use pipx" works well for you and others, but for those of us who don't know the difference between the half dozen or so different package managers that seem to be mentioned whenever Python comes up, we don't have any clue whether pipx is the "right" choice or if "uv"/"uvx" like the sibling commenter recommends is better. We could spend time researching to figure that out, but that's exactly what we're trying to avoid in the first place!
Re:Litecli: CLI for SQLite Databases with auto-completion an... by rmbyrro on Tuesday September 10, 2024 @01:38PM (#41503398)
There's nothing inherently wrong with having options.

This is the classic trade-off between convention and configuration.

You can prefer a tech stack that values convention over configuration, while others prefer the opposite.

This is totally fine.

Re:Litecli: CLI for SQLite Databases with auto-completion an... by saghm on Tuesday September 10, 2024 @04:31PM (#41505176)
I don't disagree with your premise, but I'd argue that's not what's happening here. My perception that Python doesn't have half a dozen different tools for making package management better because the community values choice and prefers it to having a default option that does everything they want, it's that the default one isn't good enough for what people seem to want, and the community is trying to make up for that.
Re:Litecli: CLI for SQLite Databases with auto-completion an... by darkteflon on Wednesday September 11, 2024 @09:06AM (#41510988)
pyproject.toml + rye/uv is excellent.
Re:Litecli: CLI for SQLite Databases with auto-completion an... by rmbyrro on Wednesday September 11, 2024 @12:47PM (#41513096)
If I had to bet, at least half Python projects use the standard packaging.

Python applications vary widly. Having a single standard option for packaging that is good enough for all isn't the core language goal.

Re:Litecli: CLI for SQLite Databases with auto-completion an... by hprotagonist on Tuesday September 10, 2024 @03:16PM (#41504443)
with choice, comes responsibility.

with no choice comes responsibility too, it's just that neither are yours, and likely aren't what you'd want.

edit: at this time, incidentally, i'm choosing to not use the VC-backed out-of-ecosystem toolchain (ruff, uv); pipx and setuptools do just fine.

Re:Litecli: CLI for SQLite Databases with auto-completion an... by saghm on Tuesday September 10, 2024 @04:34PM (#41505213)
Unfortunately, for a lot of people (including myself), the choice is increasingly to just avoid Python whenever possible rather than try to delve into all of this. I didn't even know that _any_ of the tools were VC-backed.
Re:Litecli: CLI for SQLite Databases with auto-completion an... by hprotagonist on Tuesday September 10, 2024 @05:14PM (#41505659)
It's how language ecosystems work when there's no authority with real power at the top. Python doesn't have real power at the top. Of late the SC thinks it wants to be that power. The developer base, mostly made up of people accustomed to both a language and community that is historically allergic to the idea that you can be told what not to do, largely disagrees. So, you get a cambrian explosion.

C# doesn't have this problem, for example -- though it has others. My (very brief) contact with rust crates as a user suggests that rust does; elisp/emacs absolutely does, and in spades; js might but i've never written a line so i don't know.

end of the day, python solves my business needs, so I've learned to walk the tangle. So much so that it makes sense, usually...