On 2021-02-24 19:59, Christopher Barker wrote:
I used to do that — for years. But it really did cause problems.
The trick is that you have, say, your 57 apps all working. Then you need to
update a package for one. As soon as you update, you have to go test your 57
apps, and if one of them is broken, you have to figure out how to deal with it.
Every few years I revert whatever package upgrade that caused the issue. Which
brings the house back in order. Not a substantial problem.
Now you have 52 apps running in the main environment, and 5 running in their
own... and you are on your way to an even harder to manage system.
Almost twenty years of daily python use and this situation has never happened
here. Sure, if one wants to spend time and gigs of storage to guard against
exceptional situations that's their decision.
My post was simply to push back on the idea that this is required for the
average developer. It isn't, as mentioned I have but a single venv for a big
work app. I find it less of a burden to simply fix issues as they come up,
which is almost never. Approximately ten minutes per year, sometimes zero.
Mr. Random had an interesting point to start this thread, that over-reliance on
venvs may have slowed fixes and improvements on the standard tools and
distributions. I suspect there is some truth to the assertion.
-Mike
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/LPR2VTEQR3D3SHD3LIAIRO7MGLEPT2SJ/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
