Comment 6 for bug 1176147

I don't buy the CI argument. For that use case, I'm sure you'd rather keep packages locally than depending on PyPI being up and fast in the first place. And if you keep your packages locally anyway, you can just as well keep your own binary package around, instead of relying on some externally provided binary build to match whatever your code will actually find in production.

The problem here is not so much that lxml can't be provided as binary package. It's rather that I consider it a bad idea to provide binary packages with a specific vanilla version of a statically linked libxml2/libxslt, rather than whatever your operating system distribution provides as security patched installation of those libraries. And providing dynamically linked binary packages is just screaming for hassle.