this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
92 points (98.9% liked)

Python

6467 readers
20 users here now

Welcome to the Python community on the programming.dev Lemmy instance!

📅 Events

PastNovember 2023

October 2023

July 2023

August 2023

September 2023

🐍 Python project:
💓 Python Community:
✨ Python Ecosystem:
🌌 Fediverse
Communities
Projects
Feeds

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
92
uv: Unified Python packaging (astral.sh)
submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

TL;DR: uv is an extremely fast Python package manager, written in Rust.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Is that a real problem? I've never considered that a python package manager should be or could be faster.

To be fair, I don't use python professionally.

[–] chrash0 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

definitely not the real reason for a project like this to exist. Python package management can be nightmarish at times depending on what you’re doing. between barebones requirements.txt, Poetry, and the different condas there’s a ton of fragmentation, and none of them do everything you’d want in an ideal way. above and beyond speed, i think uv is another attempt at it. but it could just be another classic xkcd moment where now there’s just another standard to deal with

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

uv is a drop-in replacement for pip. There's no extra standard. It's pareto better. Honestly the Python community would do the world a favour if the deprecated pip and adopted uv as the official tool, but you can guess how likely that is...

[–] chrash0 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

as you might have guessed i haven’t really tried it, but i have been reading about it. that said i have used “drop in replacement” tools like this (we use pnpm at work), and a drop in replacement is not without quirks. they wouldn’t have made a different tool altogether if it was really a 1:1 replacement. just because the commands are the same doesn’t mean it behaves the same. i.e. i doubt one person on the team could be using uv while everyone else sticks to pip

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

they wouldn’t have made a different tool altogether if it was really a 1:1 replacement

Why not? It's 10x faster.

I think it might have some other new features but you don't need to use those.

i doubt one person on the team could be using uv while everyone else sticks to pip

This is exactly what we do at work. There's no way I could convince everyone to switch to uv so I just switch between them based on an environment variable.

It even supports random stuff like pip install --config-settings editable_mode=compat --editable foo which is required for static tooling to work (e.g. Pyright).

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

Yes. For the project I work on pip install takes about 60 seconds and replacing it with uv reduces that to about 7 seconds. That's a very significant improvement. Much less annoying interactively and in CI we do this multiple times so it saves a significant chunk of time.

[–] Solemarc 6 points 3 months ago

The performance is just a "nice to have".

Python package management, especially at scale is infuriating. At work we use python microservices in docker containers and it infuriates me trying to update the one our team is responsible for.

I always like to rant that python 3rd party package management tools are a mistake. We should've gone for an "as simple as possible" setup instead of all this.

So I'm sceptical of UV on principle since it's yet another 3rd party package manager but if it can do all of this and not be a nightmare I'll be ok with it.