-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
Move to src layout #44
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
I'm not opposed to it, but I find this is rather debatable, and most Python packages don't do this. For pyodide src makes sense because it's a complex project. But for simple python projects the simpler it is the better. I really appreciate you doing the maintenance though! So if you want to do it, go for it :) |
Thanks, @rth. It is usually recommended that if one were to start a new package today, they should almost always go with this format rather than a flat one. However, I agree with your point about the BTW, I would say that NumPy here isn't the best example. The reason it hasn't migrated (or been able to migrate, rather) to an So, I'll leave this issue open in the meantime, and we can consider choosing the option where the vote sways to in case anyone else from our team has any thoughts. :) |
Instead of the "flat" layout, we should use the "src" layout.
More here: https://www.pyopensci.org/python-package-guide/package-structure-code/python-package-structure.html#the-src-layout-and-testing
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: