> But it is an incredible pain in the ass in production environments.
"I find it hard to maintain Python in production environments", but worded adversarially.
> One of favorites was when we did a dependency upgrade (something that required a change to Click) we had an upgrade of Black forced on us in order to satisfy Poetry which then reformatted all of our Python code.
This is literally just a misconfigured set of tools then.
> There's always someone saying "you're using it wrong" or "you're doing something worng", even if you follow the guides and howtos to get started.
This is true of all languages and frameworks. There are people _in this comment section_ insisting those that have had negative Rust experiences must simply be doing it wrong. This is more a comment on our industry than any individual technology.
> For a language which states "There should be one -- and preferably only one -- obvious way to do it"
Yes, this has always been a bold faced lie from the Python community. Marketing speak is marketing speak.
> that there is no single one way to use it right in production -- let alone an obvious one -- that makes it, simply, a "pain in the ass".
It's as much a pain in the ass as literally every piece of technology, as the above statement is true for every technology and framework that exists.
I acknowledge that you don't like it. That's great! But again, language flamewars suck, and suggesting that something is bad because you've individually had a bad experience is pretty silly. Lots of people successfully deploy and maintain python applications of various sizes without referring to the process as "a pain in the ass".