Barry A. Warsaw <ba...@python.org> added the comment: On Jun 23, 2018, at 18:56, Nick Coghlan <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > My request (wearing my "BDFL-delegate for packaging interoperability > standards" hat) is that proponents of the change resist the temptation to > view the problem that way :) > > Path files are used extensively across the Python packaging ecosystem to > implement additional environment management features beyond those provided > natively by interpreter implementations, and while we've added native > equivalents for some of them (namespace packages, virtual environments), > we're far from having added support for all of them (dynamic package version > selection, virtual environment chaining, editable package installs that still > publish correct PEP 376 package metadata, etc).
Still, I firmly believe they’re a wart being abused for purposes they weren’t really intended for. It’s a trick of implementation that lines beginning with `import` are exec’d. That being said… > Or, alternatively, the idea can be broken up into smaller, lower impact > changes that still help to address the import system and end user environment > maintainability issues, but don't involve breaking backwards compatibility. +1 on working on *much* better debuggability and discoverability for .pth files first, and then consider their eventual deprecation, replacement, and/or removal. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33944> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
