On 2021-02-24 19:59, Christopher Barker wrote:
I used to do that — for years. But it really did cause problems.
The trick is that you have, say, your 57 apps all working. Then you need to update a package for one. As soon as you update, you have to go test your 57 apps, and if one of them is broken, you have to figure out how to deal with it.
Every few years I revert whatever package upgrade that caused the issue. Which brings the house back in order. Not a substantial problem.
Now you have 52 apps running in the main environment, and 5 running in their own... and you are on your way to an even harder to manage system.
Almost twenty years of daily python use and this situation has never happened here. Sure, if one wants to spend time and gigs of storage to guard against exceptional situations that's their decision. My post was simply to push back on the idea that this is required for the average developer. It isn't, as mentioned I have but a single venv for a big work app. I find it less of a burden to simply fix issues as they come up, which is almost never. Approximately ten minutes per year, sometimes zero. Mr. Random had an interesting point to start this thread, that over-reliance on venvs may have slowed fixes and improvements on the standard tools and distributions. I suspect there is some truth to the assertion. -Mike