Python Package Managment

[Bernard Rankin]

[extracted from pylons-discuss]

I hate to pass the buck, but this is Python's fault for not having
reliable package management built in. There's nothing Pylons can do
about it except switch to another programming language.

[SNIP]

Without Setuptools,
Pylons and TurboGears couldn't exist, and Zope and Twisted
would not have been able to split themselves into several packages.
People coming to Python from Perl and Ruby expect to be able to just
run a command to download and install a package. That problem was
solved ten years ago, so why does Python still not have it standard?

If Setuptools and Virtualenv or the equivalent were built into Python,
you could trust that every computer that has successfully installed
Python can install packages and make virtual environments the same
way..

That would eliminate 2/3 of the problems users have when
installing Pylons, and the subsequent need to explain the problems and
workarounds in the installation docs. At
work people say, "Half the trouble of Pylons is installing it", and I
often have to help them install it in person because otherwise they
get stuck at some error message and have no idea what to do.

Agreed. I would even move ipython (or something like it) to core.

Of course, even Setuptools has a long way to go in some areas. (Installation Rollback, for one.)

Python is about "batteries included", and these are major "batteries" in most modern environments.

A CPAN like "in-house hosted" archive would nice, too. This way, modules have a better chance of outliving the original author's interest/commitment in paying for, possibly non-trivial, web hosting.

I'm sure these issues has been discussed to death, but I wonder what the larger Python community thinks.