On 16 January 2018 at 17:36, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > Is there a library developer workflow that's being promoted then somewhere > that I'm just not finding? Or does that need to be written for > packaging.python.org (which I might be willing to write; see below for > motivation)?
Possibly not as such, but there's a fairly broad consensus over such things as: * Use tox to test your code against the versions you want to use * Declare dependencies with install_requires and leave the version requirements loose Maybe some other things I'm not thinking of right now. But basically most projects I see use a broadly similar structure, and they are all libraries. There's nowhere near as many good examples of Python applications that I know of, and little obvious consensus (for example, there's nothing I've ever seen that suggests a "standard" method of deploying applications - the nearest thing I know of is "write the app as a library and use a console entry point", which is pretty much the opposite of a separate app development standard :-) > At least from a VS Code perspective it would be great to have a target of > supporting the workflows as documented at packaging.python.org so people > know how they should generally structure things as well as making sure VS > Code always supports the modern workflows. Also being able to say "your > workflow is not normal" is also always helpful when dealing with feature > requests. :) That's my feeling too - if we have reasonable community consensus on "normal workflows", it's a lot easier to define boundaries on what applications like pipenv or VS Code will support. Consensus is hard to come by, though... Paul _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
