Better Package Management for python

http://nvie.com/posts/better-package-management/

by ceocoder • 13 years ago

17 25 13 years ago

This did the rounds in the Python community. package management in Python is the community's blue touch paper - it's broken enough that everyone wants to fix it, workable enough that we can manage and no one can agree what exactly needs fixing.

In this case I don't think either tool is needed - pip-sync is really trying to avoid tearing down and rebuilding cleanly a virtual env - which is the whole point of virtual environments anyway.

Anyway - yes we need to fix python package management. No there is not a clear solution. But then apt-get, Tuesday updates and gems don't work "right" either.

aidos• 13 years ago

There are times when I wish pip was slightly better, but it gets the job done pretty well.

Right at this moment, with Docker coming to the fore, it's easy to imagine a world where it doesn't matter anymore.

algorias• 13 years ago

Agreed on pip-sync, but I find pip-compile to be a compelling idea (this is the first time I've heard of it).

Even small projects get cluttered requirements.txt files very fast, causing unneeded packages to spread like viruses from venv to venv, requiring coordination from the whole team to definitely eradicate, because one member's sloppy hygiene spreads the contagion back to everyone.

I don't know if pip-compile is the right answer to that problem, but it certainly seems to go in the right direction, providing living documentation of your direct requirements in the requirements.in file.

equinoxe5• 13 years ago

I personally don't feel that pip-compile is that useful. All you can achieve with it can be achieved with a "pip install" + freeze in a clean venv. OK, error detection may have some use, but you still end with almost the same effort (packages are downloaded, parsing happens and you get an error).

IMHO we'd first need to standardize how dependencies are managed (requirements.txt, setup.py ...)and then build a solution off that. if you have requirements.txt-based setup, is easy to e.g. recursively download/parse to get the full list of dependencies.

The requirements.in file reminds me of automake.

yxhuvud• 13 years ago

Gems by themselves don't work right, but how about with bundler as well?

molf2• 13 years ago

Would it be possible to create a solid, language independent package manager so that it's not necessary to create a new one for each language/community?

I'd love to see Pip, Bundler/Rubygems, NPM, Cabal, Maven, etc. replaced by a single tool (or maybe two: dependency management and package installation).

camus2• 13 years ago

Different languages work different ways, it would be really difficult.imho,I would not use a package manager that is not written in the language I use.So what language should it be ? Even if someone comes up with a generic protocol, there is no way it would answer all needs.

molf2• 13 years ago

The language doesn't matter if it's portable. One giant benefit of a single tool is in projects using multiple languages. Using multiple similar tools side by side is a pain. Even for a simple web app with JS it's already necessary to use two different package managers (client JS + server side code).

Cederfjard• 13 years ago

I'm not savvy enough to understand the complications - why would it be so difficult?

vinu76jsr• 13 years ago

I think rvm guys are trying something similar in their next iteration of RVM

_sabe_3• 13 years ago

I don't see why people keep on with virtualenv when all you need to create a sandbox is to set the PYTHONPATH environment variable...?

StavrosK4• 13 years ago

Because it's easier, and why not?

collyw• 13 years ago

I have been slightly disappointed after setting up my project in a virtualenv and upgrading some stuff on my system when some virtualenv packages broke. I thought that is what virtualenv was supposed to prevent.

(Maybe I need to read the entire virtualenv documentation, to have a solid idea of how it works, and what it does exactly, but hen that will take time, and the PYTHONPATH option starts to look more appealing, as at least I do know how environmental variables work in Linux).

_sabe_3• 13 years ago

How can it be easier to install more packages then just setting an environment variable?

equinoxe5• 13 years ago

The sad part is that I end up having multiple requirements files anyway to match the different environments (test, production, development) -- see the django applications for this. IMHO (again) we'd need some sort of structured requirements for different environments.

If I install an app/package for development, then I'd need development dependencies (like test-related packages etc.). I'm not supposed to know/care what the third party code needs for testing; just when I start testing the relevant code should "just work". Also, if I'm in production the testing-related packages should not pollute my environment...

Better Package Management for python

Related Stories