It's been six months since I asked whether uv is the future of Python packaging: https://youtu.be/_FdjW47Au30With uv 0.3.0, the answer is IN and I'll tell yo...
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.
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.
Yet another python packager
...............insane that such a popular language still doesn’t have this basic problem solved.Glad I use arch btw, pacman manages my python packages so I don’t have to deal with all this mess.
Yeah but this one is actually good. So hopefully it will displace all the others.
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.
pipis 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.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.
@CodeMonkey @ertai No it is not perfectly usable for all people, all projects, all situations. uv definitely gets much closer to that.
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.
Except that it’s slower than uv and therefore strictly worse for build processes