Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python]

[Chris Angelico]

On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Wolfgang Keller <feliphil at gmx.net> wrote:
>> > Thankfully, all actually user-friendly operating systems (MacOS,
>> > TOS, RiscOS, probably AmigaOS, MacOS X) spare(d) their users the
>> > bottomless cesspit of "package management" and/or "installers".
>> >
>> > Because on such operating systems, each and every application is an
>> > entirely self-contained package that doesn't need any "packages" or
>> > "installers" to use it.
>>
>> You mean everyone has to reinvent the proverbial wheel AND worry about
>> dependency collisions? Yeah, that's a heavenly thought.
>
> You should get a clue in stead of just fantasizing up assumptions based
> on ignorance.

I've worked with a number of operating systems, a number of dependency
management systems, and a number of absences of such systems. I stand
by my earlier statements in this thread, and I think I have a fairly
good clue about what does and doesn't work in terms of installers.

There is one way to avoid most of the duplication and still make every
application perfectly self-contained. You simply decree that there are
no dependencies permitted except for the base OS itself and what it
provides. As long as that's a rich enough set of tools, everything can
work (that's what seems to be happening on mobile platforms, for
instance). But it does mean that any unusual dependencies have to be
considered part of the app, and that means duplication.

ChrisA