I gave conda a shot and found it to be better than pip + virtualenv, but still not amazing.
Python's New Package Landscape
11–20 of 174 posts
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#12No mention of containers? I didn't write Python code since a while now, but it would have been nice to have a comparison with container technologies, which weren't available at the creation time of pypi and pip. Containers solve both the problems of the article : isolation and repeatability, for any language.
Are virtual env tools still needed in the container era?
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#13No mention of containers? I didn't write Python code since a while now, but it would have been nice to have a comparison with container technologies, which weren't available at the creation time of pypi and pip. Containers solve both the problems of the article : isolation and repeatability, for any language. Are virtual env tools still needed in the container era?
At least on non-Linux systems, containers are far more heavyweight than something like virtualenv.
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#14this incredible complexity is what docker is really good at simplifying
Maybe for deployment, but this problem has been solved well by both Yarn and Cargo.
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#15While pipenv has garnered a lot of attention and praise for ease of use, it falls over whenever I integrate it with any serious work. Pipenv lock can take 20-30 minutes on a small flask app (~18 dependencies). And it often mixes up virtualenvs, enabling the wrong one with seemingly no remedy. I see the problems on Windows, MacOS and Ubuntu. 2018 is not the year of pipenv, for me. I'm sticking with regular virtualenvs…
> Pipenv lock can take 20-30 minutes on a small flask app (~18 dependencies)
Do you have scipy/numpy/keras or cython somewhere in the deps? pipenv lock is slow, but not 20-30 mins slow unless there's a very very large download and/or a long compilation somewhere in there.
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#16While pipenv has garnered a lot of attention and praise for ease of use, it falls over whenever I integrate it with any serious work. Pipenv lock can take 20-30 minutes on a small flask app (~18 dependencies). And it often mixes up virtualenvs, enabling the wrong one with seemingly no remedy. I see the problems on Windows, MacOS and Ubuntu. 2018 is not the year of pipenv, for me. I'm sticking with regular virtualenvs…
Am I weird that I use anaconda instead of virtualenvs? I guess it’s overkill if you aren’t using the other conda features.
It is an overkill for pure-python packages or packages with simple C extensions. Conda was developed specifically to handle non-python dependencies, which would be difficult to build in setup.py.
Also, a conda package is not a replacement for a distutils/setuptools package. When building a conda package, one still calls setup.py. So every python conda package has to be a distutils/setuptools package anyway.
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#17While pipenv has garnered a lot of attention and praise for ease of use, it falls over whenever I integrate it with any serious work. Pipenv lock can take 20-30 minutes on a small flask app (~18 dependencies). And it often mixes up virtualenvs, enabling the wrong one with seemingly no remedy. I see the problems on Windows, MacOS and Ubuntu. 2018 is not the year of pipenv, for me. I'm sticking with regular virtualenvs…
Am I weird that I use anaconda instead of virtualenvs? I guess it’s overkill if you aren’t using the other conda features.
It seems that Anaconda is under-appreciated outside of pydata circles. Before using it I had no idea that it could manage virtual environments, dependencies and different versions of python.
The fact that it's not a community-driven project might be one of the reasons.
Meanwhile, in a galaxy far away, people are also using buildout.
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#18While pipenv has garnered a lot of attention and praise for ease of use, it falls over whenever I integrate it with any serious work. Pipenv lock can take 20-30 minutes on a small flask app (~18 dependencies). And it often mixes up virtualenvs, enabling the wrong one with seemingly no remedy. I see the problems on Windows, MacOS and Ubuntu. 2018 is not the year of pipenv, for me. I'm sticking with regular virtualenvs…
I tried a few of the package management in Python recently (https://www.vincentprouillet.com/blog/overview-package-manag...) and had the same conclusion with Pipenv. It is way too slow and frankly the UX is not that great either.
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#19While pipenv has garnered a lot of attention and praise for ease of use, it falls over whenever I integrate it with any serious work. Pipenv lock can take 20-30 minutes on a small flask app (~18 dependencies). And it often mixes up virtualenvs, enabling the wrong one with seemingly no remedy. I see the problems on Windows, MacOS and Ubuntu. 2018 is not the year of pipenv, for me. I'm sticking with regular virtualenvs…
> Pipenv lock can take 20-30 minutes on a small flask app (~18 dependencies) Do you have scipy/numpy/keras or cython somewhere in the deps? pipenv lock is slow, but not 20-30 mins slow unless there's a very very large download and/or a long compilation somewhere in there.
It takes about 2 minutes (feels like 5!) on my 2016 MBP to install 102 dependencies. Doing that in Docker takes about 1.5x the time. I haven't seen it take 20-30 minutes, but 2-3 minutes is still obscenely slow in my view.
Re: Python's New Package Landscape
#20I gave conda a shot and found it to be better than pip + virtualenv, but still not amazing.
I did the same and found pip_venv to be much superior