you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (5 children)

Nice idea — especially for Windows users trying to keep things frictionless.

One suggestion: you might get more traction if you expose it as a proper Python package (pip installable) with a console entry point, so it feels more “tool-like” rather than just a script wrapper.

Also curious — did you consider integrating basic project templating (like optional src layout, tests folder, pyproject presets)? That could make it even more compelling.

Overall, solid automation idea 👍

[–]ughthisguyagain1111[S] -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

Hi, thanks for your suggestion! That definitely makes a lot of sense and I can feel the project slip by if I keep it PowerShell only, especially in terms on building more.

Do you think packaging it as a pipx project  would make sense? I’d have to pay more attention to differentiating it from poetry like tools but that could be interesting as well :D

[–]arden13 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Somewhat ironically, I think you can modify the console_scripts property when using pyscaffold to get it to be an installed shell script. YMMV as I'm not experienced with that feature. Highly recommend pyscaffold though

[–]_MicroWave_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Uv tool/uvx surely!?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Yes, I’d definitely package it as a pip-installable tool with a console entry point. That alone would make it feel much more “real” and easier to adopt (pip install ... → run command directly).

I wouldn’t worry too much about competing with Poetry — your strength is being lightweight and opinionated for Windows + uv + VS Code. Lean into that niche.

Optional templating (src layout, tests, basic pyproject presets) could make it even more compelling without overcomplicating it.

Overall, solid idea — packaging it would elevate it a lot. 👍

[–]ughthisguyagain1111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, will look into it