# PEP 582 - Python local packages directory

**URL:** <https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-582-python-local-packages-directory/963>\
**Category:** Packaging\
**Created:** [March 1, 2019, 1:52am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-582-python-local-packages-directory/963 "2019-03-01T01:52:44Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 431

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![astrojuanlu](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/astrojuanlu/32/703_2.png) [@astrojuanlu](https://discuss.python.org/u/astrojuanlu)\
**Post date:** [March 28, 2023, 10:52am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-582-python-local-packages-directory/963/431 "2023-03-28T10:52:13Z")

</div>

Sad to read the PEP was rejected but on the bright side, the SC gives lots of useful and actionable advice on how could be it improved. Namely:

- More technical discussion on how this interacts with other `sys.path` mangling mechanisms.
- More discussion on “progressive enhancement” or a transition path to other environment management methods (if needed?!).
- More “social proof” that “the community” (and not only the people that happen to be engaged in this Discourse?) (although maybe not _all_ the community, but a piece of it, namely beginners) would find this valuable, useful, and a net improvement over existing methods.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-582-python-local-packages-directory/963)._