This pretty much mirrors my experience trying to package Python code for any kind of use. Jesus it's a mess with pretty much everyone resorting incompatible 3rd party tooling. I really really hope it gets better and we eventually reach a turning point.
> Firstly, TOML. This is something I’ve been repeating for quite some time already, so I’ll just quickly go over it. I like TOML, I think it’s a reasonable choice for markup. However, without a TOML parser in stdlib (and there’s no progress in providing one), this means that every single build system now depends on tomli, and involves a circular dependency. A few months back, every single build system depended on toml instead but that package became unmaintained. Does that make you feel confident?
This seems crazy bad. I had naively assumed that when the PEP was adopted it included the parser. I genuinely can't believe they adopted an ini type format without a native parser when Python already has ConfigParser.
> Firstly, TOML. This is something I’ve been repeating for quite some time already, so I’ll just quickly go over it. I like TOML, I think it’s a reasonable choice for markup. However, without a TOML parser in stdlib (and there’s no progress in providing one), this means that every single build system now depends on tomli, and involves a circular dependency. A few months back, every single build system depended on toml instead but that package became unmaintained. Does that make you feel confident?
This seems crazy bad. I had naively assumed that when the PEP was adopted it included the parser. I genuinely can't believe they adopted an ini type format without a native parser when Python already has ConfigParser.