Forks are good. The pure Python ecosystem and core language developers have 
left package management and distribution in a very broken state for the 
scientific stack for way too long, and Continuum had to come in and fix the 
situation themselves. They did so, users followed, and they even released the 
result as open source under a compatible license. The rest of the python 
ecosystem has demonstrated unmitigated tone deafness to the requirements of the 
scientific ecosystem by not learning from and adopting more of the way conda 
does things.

Does winpython have a minimal core and a binary-only package management system 
on top of it? Do they have binaries for the likes of scipy, matplotlib, jupyter 
etc that work with pycall and ijulia? We can consider supporting it if it 
works, but if it doesn't work as well as Conda we shouldn't endorse it. Working 
software is what matters to users, more than ideology.

If someone wants to fork Julia or its package management, we would welcome the 
brainstorming of ideas and as long as the license of any new additions remains 
MIT, we can incorporate the improvements. Most forkers would rather fold their 
improvements back upstream, eventually, especially with large fast-moving 
projects. Look at what happened with io.js and node.js over the last year. 
Python-dev should have done the same, but they didn't.

Reply via email to