The curation of the batteries is the value add. Which grpc package do I want? Which json? Which random number generator? Finding which rust crate is the norm for any given thing, is a task in itself. Then there is the security aspect. Pulling in hundreds of repos with many authors each, is a security risk.
The curation you're relying on is probably not delivering what you hope. If you picked a Rust crate by looking at a SO answer from say 2020, you're probably getting a similar quality of "curation" in Python's standard libraries.
Not because the Python maintainers are intentionally doing a bad job, it's just that their mission isn't to substitute for your research. To them, "Does last year's Python script still work?" is always higher priority than "What's the best way to do it today?".
And what Python's security team decide constitutes a reasonable security fix may conflict pretty badly with what you need.
"Does last year's code still work" is very important to almost all programmers. I wouldn't want to accidentally use a library that gets abandoned or deprecated a few months after I made it an integral part of my software. Being able to mostly stick to the standard lib makes this a lot easier.
That works for Rust's standard library, which won't abandon anything stable (stuff gets deprecated, but that just results in a build warning).
It doesn't make as much sense for Python's standard library where you'd need to be paying attention to goings-on in the community to know if one of the batteries that are included has been judged expired and will be removed.
SO would disable a question of this type for being opinion-based.
I would assume the Python devs review the code for a package before including it in the standard lib, right? That seems like a pretty big deal, well beyond someone just telling you that they tried a package and it worked for them.
