On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 7:36 AM Ricky Teachey email@example.com wrote:
But what about `pip install more-itertools`? Hopefully you become comfortable with that a lot faster than 3 years in. If not, the packaging team will probably be disappointed to hear it…
(I have occasionally had other people insist that I shouldn’t tell users to pip install things… )
pip install more-itertools is a GREAT solution for the problem I described, something I think the average 100% self-taught, never-used-the-command-line-before, learning-in-their-spare-time beginner (which is what I was) can get comfortable with within the first month, I'd say.
There is SOME truth to this of course, so it helps a lot when the elder statesfolks "oh when you need to do X, a great 3rd party package for that is Y." I have never heard of more-itertools until today. I'll definitely be suggesting others use it, and use it myself.
There is a LOT of truth to it. If you have a problem, you search the web for it, and the first hit is a pip-installable (or npm-installable or gem-installable etc) package, how do you know whether it's a good solution to your problem or a brand new time sink (or worse)? Sometimes, an unfortunate choice of keyword can mean a completely unknown package ranks higher than a far better one, just because its description happens to match the way you chose to word your problem.
The stdlib does reference a small number of third-party packages (requests etc). We don't want to go overboard with that, but I think more-itertools is worth referencing. Maybe there needs to be a second-tier recommendation, where a list of packages can be given that aren't category killers, but have been given the blessing of the Python devs as "this is a good-quality, well-maintained package, and can be depended on"?