The Python Steering Committee rejected the PEP 582 proposal – Python local packages directory, which islocal package directory.

This PEP proposes adding an automatic recognition to Python__pypackages__directory, and prefer importing packages installed in this location over user or global site-packages. This will avoid the steps of creating, activating or deactivating a “virtual environment”.When present, Python will use the__pypackages__.

CPython core developer Thomas Wouters announced the news on the proposal’s discussion group.

He said this was a deliberate decision by the Steering Committee, and while the implementation of the PEP may seem simple (adding another directory to sys. When combined with other means of affecting the module search path (virtual environments, user-local installs, PYTHONPATH, .pth files, sitecustomize, etc.).

Overall, there doesn’t seem to be a convincing argument that this would indeed result in a net benefit. There is also disagreement among the packaging community, with no clear beneficial use cases for new features. also, __pypackages__ or a similar solution is already available via sys.path One of the many existing customization mechanisms for , such as .pth files or sitecustomize module.

The Steering Committee is willing to reconsider if there is a clearer consensus among the community, or if there are stronger arguments for the benefits of the proposal.