Difference between inbuild `python` and `python-mode`

Apparently there is a package called python. It's built-in, and also distributed through GNU ELPA: [https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/python.html](https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/python.html) And there is *different one* called python-mode in MELPA: [https://melpa.org/#/python-mode](https://melpa.org/#/python-mode), with upstream at [https://gitlab.com/python-mode-devs/python-mode/](https://gitlab.com/python-mode-devs/python-mode/) What is the difference between them? The background of my question is that I tried to setup my Emacs 27 as a python environment with a language server like David Wilson (aka SystemCrafter) described in his tutorial. This is a codesnippet of it. ```lisp (use-package lsp-mode :commands (lsp lsp-deferred) :init (setq lsp-keymap-prefix "C-l") :config (lsp-enable-which-key-integration t) ) (use-package python-mode :ensure t :hook (python-mode . lsp-deferred) :custom (python-shell-interpreter "python3") ) ``` I am not sure but it looks like that the `python-mode` here cause the use of the MELPA version of `python-mode`. How can I setup the inbuild python mode of Emacs include the use of the language server?

Can you try use-package python instead of use-package python-mode?

Yes, this is confusing. python.el (which implements `python-mode`, sigh) was created by Emacs users for python. The separate package python-mode.el *also* implements its own `python-mode`, but was written and is maintained by people connected to the python project. The former is shipped with Emacs. The latter includes a bunch of custom python modules to aid with completion and other things, which it does by interrogating a live python process (python.el also does this, but to a lesser extent). To add yet more, there is elpy.el, which is a package that sits on top of python.el and adds lots of other features, like (Jedi-based) refactoring/renaming, syntax checking, venv support, etc. But if you are using lsp-mode, most of the in-buffer "code awareness/actions" like completion, docstring, renaming and code lookup, etc. will come from the lsp server. So in that case, the differences I expect will not be that great, and come down to fontification, key bindings, code manipulation, navigation conveniences, and that type of thing.

Elpy is not an option. I still run this in a different configuration and have some problems with it. And it is to much for me. I only need code highlighting, linting and as a bonus some completion and documentation. If I understood your right there is no big/relevant difference between the two python modes/packages? In that case I would go for the Emacs inbuild mode. What confuses me is that I can not see any package in \`M-x list-packages\` named \`python\` or \`python-mode\`. How do I find out which one is installed or currently active?

*If* you use LSP, they will be pretty similar, for the stuff lsp-mode isn't already delivering. C-h f python-mode, click on the file name and you'll see whether it's in elpa or the distributed packages.

Sigh, yeah, the history around it is even more complex... The present python mode that ships with Emacs is a wholesale, more or less, replacement for the _old_ one that used to ship with Emacs. The original was written by Dave Love, if I recall correctly. Both are annoyingly named `python.el` The `python-mode.el` that OP refers to is indeed one by people associated with the python project. One common difference -- back in the day anyway -- was that `python-mode.el` did a rather poor job of behaving like a proper Emacs major mode. Dumb things like not supporting `kill-sexp` & friends on triple-quoted docstrings, among other grievances. It did have a lot more features, in theory, but none of them worked well. Dave Love's old mode behaved like an Emacs mode should, but had fewer overall features, and a couple of weird remnants from a bygone era, like support for "bicycle repair man", a refactoring tool that never really worked very well either. The "new" mode that ships with Emacs is -- today -- pretty good. It wasn't in the beginning, and why nobody bothered to extend the existing one, and instead giving it the heave-ho I'll never understand. But meh, I digress. I lugged around the old one for about 5-6 years before I finally switched to the default one. I recommend OP stick to the built-in one, enable tree-sitter in it + lsp/eglot and not worry :)