Comment by mtlmtlmtlmtl

I'm one of you.

I'm about the highest tier of package manager nerd you'll find out there, but despite all that, I've been struggling to create/run/manage venvs out there for ages. Always afraid of installing a pip package or some piece of python-based software (that might muck up Python versions).

I've been semi-friendly with Poetry already, but mostly because it was the best thing around at the time, and a step in the right direction.

uv has truely been a game changer. Try it out!

As a Ruby guy: uv makes Python feel like it finally passed the year 2010.

As a developer: it basically solved all of my problems that could be solved by a package manager.

As an occasional trainer of scientists: it didn't seem to help my students.

I'm (reluctantly) a python guy, and uv really is a much different experience for me than all the other tools. I've otherwise had much the same experience as you describe here. Maybe it's because `uv` is built in rust? ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯

But I'd also hesitate to say it "solves all my problems". There's plenty of python problems outside of the core focus of `uv`. For example, I think building a python package for distribution is still awkward and docs are not straightforward (for example, pointing to non-python files which I want to include was fairly annoying to figure out).

It doesn't handle python version management, it only handles pip. It doesn't solve bundling Python.

As a mainly Python guy (Data Engineering so new project for every ETL pipeline = a lot of projects) uv solved every problem I had before with pip, conda, miniconda, pipx etc.

Isn’t UV essentially cargo for python?

I know, but uv truly is different.

I’m a “Python guy” in that I write Python professionally, but also am like you in that I’ve been extremely underwhelmed by Portry/Pipenv/etc.

Python dependencies are still janky, but uv is a significant improvement over existing tools in both performance and ergonomics.