There was a bunch of hubbub around a preemptive promotion of the `pipenv` package to be _the_ package for managing dependencies in python.
There was also a period when development and releases was happening in a somewhat frenzied manner and some github issues were being handled / closed in an antagonistic fashion. I don't know how extensive these issues were, but I remember seeing a few examples that seemed to back up the claims.
At risk of potentially stepping into overly personal territory: As I understand it, Kenneth was unfortunately dealing with some mental health stuff during part of that time period. He posted a blog post that mentioned this.
> There was a bunch of hubbub around a preemptive promotion of the `pipenv` package to be _the_ package for managing dependencies in python.
AFAIK that never happened, and was only marketing from his side, and never an official stance from the PSF (or whoever would be the authoritative source). That's just one the many questionable things that has happened with him in the past.
I think there was language added to the front of some official python website (one of pypa's I think?) that gave that impression. It was later changed.
Yeah, it's true that the marketing around pypenv was definitely over the top.
There was also a period when development and releases was happening in a somewhat frenzied manner and some github issues were being handled / closed in an antagonistic fashion. I don't know how extensive these issues were, but I remember seeing a few examples that seemed to back up the claims.
At risk of potentially stepping into overly personal territory: As I understand it, Kenneth was unfortunately dealing with some mental health stuff during part of that time period. He posted a blog post that mentioned this.
Here's one related HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18612590
My bias: During my usage of pipenv, while it seemed very promising, I felt that it wasn't fully production ready and had some problematic warts.