uv IS the Future of Python Packaging 🐍📦 (www.youtube.com)

submitted 1 month ago by norambna@programming.dev to c/python@programming.dev

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

via https://mastodon.social/@hynek/113227146595211210

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] ertai@programming.dev 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yet another python packager............... insane that such a popular language still doesn't have this basic problem solved.

[-] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 7 points 1 month ago

Yeah but this one is actually good. So hopefully it will displace all the others.

[-] sum_yung_gai@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

I use poetry and it works really well. I would consider it solved but that doesn't mean there isn't the possibility of a better solution.

[-] CodeMonkey@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago

pip is a perfectly usable package manager and is included in most python distributions now. Is it perfect? No, but it is good enough for every team I have been on.

[-] astrojuanlu@social.coop 11 points 1 month ago

@CodeMonkey @ertai No it is not perfectly usable for all people, all projects, all situations. uv definitely gets much closer to that.

[-] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

it's usable, yet it doesn't attempt to solve a a third of the problems uv, poetry, and pdm address.

it's also not hard to end up with a broken env with pip.

[-] Moc@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Except that it’s slower than uv and therefore strictly worse for build processes

[-] uthredii@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

Putting aside the speed uv has a bunch of features that usually require 2-4 separate tools. These tools are very popular but not very well liked. The fact these tools are so popular proves that pip is not sufficient for many use cases. Other languages have a single tool (e.g. cargo) that are very well liked.