Why wouldn't I just `go install` from the git repo? Why is it worth encouraging the use of python tooling for generic application distribution when things like homebrew or chocolatey already exist?

▲

je42 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You would need to have go installed. For my golang opensource project, also added releases on pypi and also npm.

▲

bbg2401 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

From what I recall, Simon believes non-technical people or developers new to an ecosystem (or lacking a specific toolchain) should be given options to use existing language-specific package repositories and package management tools to reduce friction while engaging in agentic coding.

I can see the rationale but I can't help thinking it's utterly absurd.

▲

WhyNotHugo 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What kind of "non-technical" person is fine with using "pip install …", but not "go install …"?

	▲	mbreese 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The kind of person who only knows Python or has learned a bit by following a Python tutorial. There are a lot more resources for people who are just starting to learn programming in Python. I can also see a use-case where there is an image with pip installed, but not any of the Golang packages. It’s kind of niche, but I can see a place for it.

▲

verdverm 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Is uvx and python aware of GOOS / GOARCH when using this method? It looks like it, but also means you have to download all of the binaries instead of just the one you need?

I agree it is absurd, and then there has to be a python package one has to create, something go avoided by using the git repo URL directly