The OP author is very familiar with uv, having written multiple articles on it. Pushes it onto his students. So i get it, the article is focused on uv and he is invested in uv. This assessment is a tiny bit unfair, but enough, only, to justify reading the article with a tiny grain of salt.
For package management, i’m happy with pyenv. So there i have a bias.
The biggest praise i have is, it follows the UNIX philosophy, do one thing and do it well. uv does multiple things, the issue comes down to resources required to maintain a super complex thing. Especially in a completely different coding language! I DONT GIVE TWO SHIATS IF ITS FASTER, I care about maintainability after the original geniuses disappear and they will.
dependency management
Any blog post which doesn’t mention competitors, tiny grain of salt --> giant grain of salt.
If not mentioned, have to assume either don’t know about them or haven’t bothered to try them.
What are the actual competitors to uv (specifically for dependency management)?
The only package mentioned is: poetry
poetry also violates the UNIX philosophy. It combines build backend with dependency management. I want them separate.
Open up that super powerful doom pr0n machine, AI, and get it to find the other (dependency management packages). Mention them in the blog post.
Because I’m a freelancer dev, and also a trainer, I get to navigate those waters and I’ve seen all other tools fail spectacularly. pyenv, poetry, pipenv, pdm, pyflow, pipx, anaconda…
As well as discusses anaconda later in relation to CLI and GUI.
The speed is really fantastic, there’s nothing else I can say. If you don’t see a benefit, the it’s fine of course. But going from insanely long resolution times in my previous work place using conda to now resolving stuff in a matter of seconds is incredible. uv is the first tool I have used for Python that just feels right.
This is why the Python landscape is such a mess in the first place. The “one thing” should have been project management. Instead, we end up with 20 different tools that have a very limited context, often overlapping or being mutually exclusive to each other in functionality, and it’s up to each project to adopt and configure them correctly.
The mass adoption of uv is a clear sign that we’re tired of this flawed approach. Leave the Unix philosophy to core utilities of an OS.
The biggest praise i have is, it follows the UNIX philosophy, do one thing and do it well.
That isn’t a pro on its own, and it’s also a very wooly rule. Uv does one thing and it does it well - Python project management.
the issue comes down to resources required to maintain a super complex thing
They seem to be managing fine. I guess having a company back it is enough. But that is also probably my biggest worry about it - what if Astral goes away (which given their apparent lack of business model I suspect they eventually will)? Hopefully uv is popular enough by that point it won’t die.
I DONT GIVE TWO SHIATS IF ITS FASTER
It’s literally 10x faster. I’m not sure what kind of person wouldn’t care about that.
It’s literally 10x faster. I’m not sure what kind of person wouldn’t care about that.
On that, lets agree to disagree.
Thru magic Astral has funding. I don’t. So why shoulder the risk that their magical situation will continue forever.
When Astral goes tits up, which we seem to agree on, and everyone is whining crying and screaming, at least there is one or more fallback(s) written in Python which is/are maintainable by people without magical super powers.
I don’t know why you think maintaining uv will require magical superpowers. Writing it in the first place requires a ton of work, sure. But that seems to be mostly done.
The OP author is very familiar with uv, having written multiple articles on it. Pushes it onto his students. So i get it, the article is focused on uv and he is invested in uv. This assessment is a tiny bit unfair, but enough, only, to justify reading the article with a tiny grain of salt.
For package management, i’m happy with pyenv. So there i have a bias.
The biggest praise i have is, it follows the UNIX philosophy,
do one thing and do it well. uv does multiple things, the issue comes down to resources required to maintain a super complex thing. Especially in a completely different coding language! I DONT GIVE TWO SHIATS IF ITS FASTER, I care about maintainability after the original geniuses disappear and they will.dependency management
Any blog post which doesn’t mention competitors, tiny grain of salt --> giant grain of salt.
If not mentioned, have to assume either don’t know about them or haven’t bothered to try them.
What are the actual competitors to uv (specifically for dependency management)?
The only package mentioned is: poetry
poetry also violates the UNIX philosophy. It combines build backend with dependency management. I want them separate.
Open up that super powerful doom pr0n machine, AI, and get it to find the other (dependency management packages). Mention them in the blog post.
The article quite clearly mentions competition:
As well as discusses anaconda later in relation to CLI and GUI.
The speed is really fantastic, there’s nothing else I can say. If you don’t see a benefit, the it’s fine of course. But going from insanely long resolution times in my previous work place using conda to now resolving stuff in a matter of seconds is incredible. uv is the first tool I have used for Python that just feels right.
I recommend listening to the podcast from Real Python that talks with Charlie, they discuss the commercial aspect https://realpython.com/podcasts/rpp/238/
“Do one thing and one thing well”
This is why the Python landscape is such a mess in the first place. The “one thing” should have been project management. Instead, we end up with 20 different tools that have a very limited context, often overlapping or being mutually exclusive to each other in functionality, and it’s up to each project to adopt and configure them correctly.
The mass adoption of uv is a clear sign that we’re tired of this flawed approach. Leave the Unix philosophy to core utilities of an OS.
That isn’t a pro on its own, and it’s also a very wooly rule. Uv does one thing and it does it well - Python project management.
They seem to be managing fine. I guess having a company back it is enough. But that is also probably my biggest worry about it - what if Astral goes away (which given their apparent lack of business model I suspect they eventually will)? Hopefully uv is popular enough by that point it won’t die.
It’s literally 10x faster. I’m not sure what kind of person wouldn’t care about that.
reminds me of the ol’ joke
young bull: lets run down the hill and get us a heffer
old bull: lets walk down and do 'em all
wtf is your rush?
It literally doesn’t matter how long it takes. Especially when Astral has moved on.
Found the Python dev…
Thru magic Astral has funding. I don’t. So why shoulder the risk that their magical situation will continue forever.
When Astral goes tits up, which we seem to agree on, and everyone is whining crying and screaming, at least there is one or more fallback(s) written in Python which is/are maintainable by people without magical super powers.
I don’t know why you think maintaining uv will require magical superpowers. Writing it in the first place requires a ton of work, sure. But that seems to be mostly done.