On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 8:34 AM Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Totally different topic, but I do think that a "curated" package repo > would be helpful -- there is a lot of cruft on PyPi :-( > > > > That idea gets thrown around every once in a while, but there are a > few problems with it. Well yes, many .... I think there are a lot of packages that we could all agree are cruft -- pre-release stuff that hasn't been updated in years, etc, etc. Then there are those that have become pseudo standards: numpy, requests, more-itertools.. Then there is EVERYTHING in between -- which is most (by number anyway). So what would a "curated" package repo be? I'm not sure -- though I'd like to see even a small amount of curation -- some barrier to get over so that we don't have the confusion of the real cruft. Unfortunately, the laudable goal of a low barrier to entry for putting a package up on PyPi, and the culture of packaging documentation oriented to PyPi means that a lot of folks put stuff up there even though there are few if any other users. So I think light curation would help a lot. [*] If the PSF recommends a package Who said anything about the PSF? ;-) -- but yes, that would be another way to go -- a tightly curated collection -- lower barrier to entry than the standard library, but still pretty high. Which is a huge burden on the developer(s). Sure -- but it should be, that's kind of the point -- the idea is to have a way to identify high quality well maintained packages. > And someone has to go through all those > packages, and then discuss it with whoever else has to be responsible > for this curated collection, and come to an agreement. > yup -- that's the biggest problem right there. > Instead, what I'd like to see is: Personal, individual blogs, > recommending packages that the author knows about and can give genuine > advice about. Provide YOUR curated collection. Are there not a lot of these already? -- That's how the current "cream of the crop" has risen for years. But it doesn't solve the OP's issue -- IIUC, they want to have some assurance that a given package is something that can be relied on, without having to do a bunch of research. Decentralize! > Actually, I think the Decentralized nature of what we have now is part of the problem. But this does give me an idea -- a single site that can collect recommendations and reviews -- maybe even as part of PyPi itself -- that could help folks find the good ones. -Chris B [*] conda-forge is an example of light curation -- nothing goes on the conda-forge channel without approval of the conda-forge core team. But they are reviewing only the conda package itself -- is it built right?, is it compatible with the rest of conda-forge?, does it have its license included?, ... -- not the quality or usefulness of the package itself. But this barrier to entry means that no one puts anything up there unless they have a good reason to, and there are some assurances that things will work together. I think even that helps a lot. > > ChrisA > _______________________________________________ > 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/OGFJOPQPNV4YH6QPOAJXKDWVIMXNHHIS/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ > -- Christopher Barker, PhD (Chris) Python Language Consulting - Teaching - Scientific Software Development - Desktop GUI and Web Development - wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython
_______________________________________________ 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/QI64B7QD473FP452NJ3KQMHZYSMFGXZO/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
