[javchz]

Agree. I mostly do front end in my day job, and despite JavaScript being a bit of a mess lang, dealing with npm is way better than juggling anaconda, miniforge, Poetry, pip, venv, etc depending on the project.

UV is such a smooth UX that it makes you wonder how something like it wasn’t part of Python from the start.

[baq]

+1

…but we did have to wait for cargo, npm (I include yarn and pnpm here) and maybe golang to blaze the ‘this is how it’s done’ trail. Obvious in hindsight.

[dontlaugh]

Ruby's bundler had already invented the correct model many years ago. It only took time for others to accept that.

[zelphirkalt]

Wait, a bundler? What needs to be bundled when using Ruby? Maybe this is not the same meaning as with JS bundlers. And why does a bundles manage dependencies?

[dontlaugh]

It’s what it’s called https://bundler.io/

No sillier than the other various package managers.

[hackerbrother]

Yeah, but unlike bundle, uv locks in your Python version and downloads that Python version as needed. It’s like bundle and rbenv combined.

[dontlaugh]

Sure. That seems less important to me than the packages. As long as the language version is checked, that’s the important bit.

[Aeolun]

More importantly, migrating from npm, to pnpm, to yarn, to bun, is very nearly seamless. Migrating in the Python ecosystem? Not anywhere close.

[woodrowbarlow]

standardizing pyproject.toml helped but it didn't go quite far enough.

[EdwardDiego]

Feels like you're doing it wrong if you're dealing with all of those.

[IshKebab]

"depending on the project"

[zelphirkalt]

You mean off the job you have to juggle all those tools? On the job that would be kind of crazy, to allow every project its own tool chain.