I'm not sure what you are labeling as pet projects of leadership? Is there something the PSF is doing that you consider a pet project rather than part of their core mission?

▲ mixmastamyk 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, outreach before investing in packaging. It’s not that outreach is bad but that packaging was crumbling.

▲ nedbat 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm not sure how you got to "before" here. The PSF runs PyPI, organizes the Python Packaging Authority, supports sprints and standardization efforts, funds developers in residence and so on. Packaging is improving, partly because of those efforts. It's not an either/or.

▲ mixmastamyk 3 hours ago | parent [-]

https://devclass.com/2025/03/10/pypi-repository-takes-steps-...

    > CPython core developer Paul Moore described his involvement in the
    > packaging community and said: “it’s struggling under the weight of its own
    > popularity … the individuals involved are doing their best under what are
    > frankly near-impossible conditions.”

    > Moore questioned whether the fact that so many businesses now depend on
    > Python and PyPI meant that “maybe a purely volunteer basis simply can’t
    > work any more,” though he hoped this is not the case.

▲

nedbat 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, it could use more funding. Glad to see that Anthropic is helping. It's still not an either/or situation. The PSF would not be fulfilling their mission if they only funded packaging until packaging was "solved" (whatever that might mean) and only then did they fund outreach.

	▲	mixmastamyk 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I didn't say either/or, and was talking about priorities. One shouldn't install a fancy roof when the foundation is crumbling. > The PSF would not be fulfilling their mission if they only funded packaging until packaging was "solved" (whatever that might mean) and only then did they fund outreach. They did the opposite. So they still didn't fulfill it, to the extent that Mozilla, ChanZuck, and astral felt compelled to step in.