31–40 of 1001 posts
curl|sh and iwr|iex chills my spine, no one should recommend these methods of installation in 2025. I'm against closed computers but I'm also against reckless install. Even without the security concerns these way of installation tends to put files in a whole random places making it hard to manage and cleanup.
/just guessing, haven't tried it
(Transparently, I'm posting this before I've completed the article.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the biggest value of uv was replacing pyenv for managing multiple versions of python. So uv replaced pyenv+pyenv-virtualenv+pip
This is it. Later versions of python .11/.12/.13 have significant improvements and differences. Being able to seamlessly test/switch between them is a big QOL improvement. I don't love that UV is basically tied to a for profit company, Astral. I think such core tooling should be tied to the PSF, but that's a minor point. It's partially the issue I have with Conda too.
I just... build from source and make virtual environments based off them as necessary. Although I don't really understand why you'd want to keep older patch versions around. (The Windows installers don't even accommodate that, IIRC.) And I can't say I've noticed any of those "significant improvements and differences" between patch versions ever mattering to my own projects.
> I don't love that UV is basically tied to a for profit company, Astral. I think such core tooling should be tied to the PSF, but that's a minor point. It's partially the issue I have with Conda too.
In my book, the less under the PSF's control, the better. The meager funding they do receive now is mostly directed towards making PyCon happen (the main one; others like PyCon Africa get a pittance) and to certain grants, and to a short list of paid staff who are generally speaking board members and other decision makers and not the people actually developing Python. Even without considering "politics" (cf. the latest news turning down a grant for ideological reasons) I consider this gross mismanagement.
pyenv was problematic because you needed the right concoction of system packages to ensure it compiled python with the right features, and we have a mix of MacOS and Linux devs so this was often non-trivial.
uv is much faster than both of these tools, has a more ergonomic CLI, and solves both of the issues I just mentioned.
I'm hoping astral's type checker is suitably good once released, because we're on mypy right now and it's a constant source of frustration (slow and buggy).
These rust based tools really change the idea of what's possible (when you can get feedback in milliseconds). But I'm trying to figure out what Astral as a company does for revenue. I don't see any paid products on their website. They even have investors. So far it seems like they have a bunch of these high performance tools. Is this part of an upcoming product suite for python or something? Just curious. I'm not a f…
These rust based tools really change the idea of what's possible (when you can get feedback in milliseconds). But I'm trying to figure out what Astral as a company does for revenue. I don't see any paid products on their website. They even have investors. So far it seems like they have a bunch of these high performance tools. Is this part of an upcoming product suite for python or something? Just curious. I'm not a f…
I must be the odd man out but I am not a fan of uv. 1. It tries to do too many things. Please just do one thing and do it well. It's simultaneously trying to replace pip, pyenv, virtualenv, and ruff in one command. 2. You end up needing to use `uv pip` so it's not even a full replacement for pip. 3. It does not play well with Docker. 4. It adds more complexity. You end up needing to understand all of these new enviro…
- uv add
- uv sync
- uv run
Feels very ergonomic, I don't need to think much, and it's so much faster.