simonw 17 hours ago

uv is very forkable - dual-licensed under Apache and MIT, high quality codebase, it's Rust rather than Python but the Python community has an increasing amount of Rust experience these days.

That's why I'm not personally too nervous about the strategic risk to the Python community of having such a significant piece of the ecosystem from a relatively young VC-backed company.

Reply View 0 replies
baq 18 hours ago

If you froze uv today it’ll take years for anything to get to a state where the switch would be worth it.

Reply View 0 replies
andrewl-hn 18 hours ago

Honestly, given the constant rollercoaster of version management and building tools for Python the move to something else would be expected rather than surprising.

I’ve seems like a great tool, but I remember thinking the same about piping, too.

Reply View 2 replies
  • baq 17 hours ago

    uv is a revolution in every possible positive sense of the word in the Python world and I've been here since 1.5. it is imperative that bitter oldtimers like us try it, I did and the only regret I've got is that I didn't do it sooner.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • zelphirkalt 10 hours ago

      I also tried it and am now using it for new projects. But I was just fine with Poetry too. Yes, uv is faster and probably better code. But my use-cases didn't necessitate to re-create the venvs frequently, so the slowness of Poetry didn't matter that much to me, and I am not using the "one-off script" kind of approaches that uv enables (writing the dependencies in a comment in the script itself).

      So, yeah, uv is nice, but for me didn't fundamentally change that much.

      Reply View 0 replies