[kstenerud]

The alternative is an opinionated build system defined by the language developers.

Like any dictatorship, that can be fine if those in charge are benevolent and competent. For programming languages, the first is almost always true, but the second is far from guaranteed. Skill at programming language development has no bearing on skill at developing a build, packaging, and distribution system.

Go is a prime example of this. The language is pleasant to use with few ugly surprises, but their build system has been awful for a decade, only now reaching a semi-decent state with modules (which are still pretty damn ugly).

With python, on the other hand, there's competition in this space, and as a result the tools are pretty nice, albeit fragmented.

But then there's rust, which has a nice language AND a nice build system. You take a big risk when building both the language and build system; sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. And you risk fragmentation if you don't. It's a tough choice.

[ownagefool]

The thing is, Golang and Python had the same problem with regards to depenencies, in that they punted on the problem and the community came up with several competing products that confused users.