-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 62
Can the Python Package Tools Decision Diagram be simplified #489
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
+1 that all makes sense. Another way to simplify could be to have a "fast exit" branch in the decision tree that's like "i just want you to tell me what to use -> hatch" or something |
I'm happy to support a simpler version of that diagram. Could we use Mermaid or something easier for others to edit? Right now, it's an AI / svg / pdf file. I'm happy to share that too... whatever y'all think. NOTE: today in our open space we got a lot of feedback that we should update the packaging guide to reflect the current state of tools. This means also mentioning UV. not related to this diagram --- yet, but related to some of the other issues opened. |
While I do like mermaid, and it might make it easier to remotely collaborate on graphics like this, I believe we would have to adopt a new sphinx plugin to use it on the site. Which is doable. The other downside would be loosing most of that great design. With mermaid, we could set the colours to match the rest of the sight, but that would be about where the branding would have to stop. |
Ok no problem. How about I move the file from Adobe to an inscape compatible SVG version? We could then host it either here or we could host versions of it on zenodo instead I have been fighting with mermaid for another diagram! it's pretty hard to make it look readable. So maybe svg is best. I wish it was in canva. maybe that is a future thing I can work on for easier remote editing. |
#518 added svg and instructions / fonts etc |
Ok - have a look at this link. I made a copy of the diagram and we can edit it there. I can add anyone to the file who wants to take a stab at edits OR you should be able to comment on the file too. let's update it to meet our current needs. it hasn't been updated in exactly a year! |
I recently revisited the decision diagram at https://www.pyopensci.org/python-package-guide/package-structure-code/python-package-build-tools.html#tools-for-building-your-package and noticed that it seems to be more complicated than necessary.
Specifically, the check "Does my package have a few c/c++ extensions?" does not seem to provide any value. Both paths suggest the same front-end and back-end choices.
I am also confused why the
Build
tool is called out. It has**
on two of the mentions,*
on another, but I don't see any footnotes in the diagram or on the page.Finally, while I am here I also want to make a soft recommendation that tool suggestions only be given on terminal tree nodes, as is required in a traditional decision tree.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: