Back out "Rename modules and files to msgspec_m"
#7
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This backs out commit b573a8e.
mscolnick
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This reverts commit b573a8e.
Originally, I wanted to make imports in marimo more explicit. We need to be cautious about our core dependencies, since they must coexist with user dependencies in the same environment. Renaming the provided package guaranteed that we wouldn’t conflict with the original msgspec module (if installed by a user) in any way.
However, I now believe reverting that decision is the better approach, for several reasons:
Better for the community. This project can serve as a drop-in replacement for users seeking bug fixes (as discussed in Python 3.14 annotations support fix #5 (comment)).
Smaller diffs. We can minimize changes to the source code. Only modifying what’s necessary for bug fixes, instead of maintaining a renamed fork.
My original concern was that installing both msgspec and msgspec_m in the same environment could cause conflicts, since they both provide a top-level msgspec package. To be clear, that concern is valid: if both distributions are installed in the same environment, their files will conflict. In practice, whichever distribution is installed last will overwrite the other’s files, and
import msgspecwill resolve to that version. While not ideal, I think this is acceptable — such an environment would be explicitly user-created, and it would encourage either migration to our drop-in replacement msgspec_m or continued use of the original msgspec.