[kstrauser]

I’m certain there’s going to be so bizarre edge case where pip is fine and uv isn’t. It’s inevitable. However, in every situation where I’ve used it, pip is better than pip or poetry or any other package manager I’ve ever used.

I just found out they’re still making pipenv. Yes, if you’re using pipenv, I’m confident that uv will be a better experience in every way, except maybe “I like using pipenv so I can take long coffee breaks every time I run it”.

[walkabout]

Yeah, I’m just skeptical because I was at an agency in the heat of yarn-mania, waaaay after people online were proclaiming npm dead and pointless, and it went poorly enough that we developed a ha-ha-only-serious joke that you knew a project was properly in-development when someone had lost a half-day debugging some really weird error only to find that “npm install” instantly fixed it, and then switched the started-in-yarn codebase over to npm.

[kstrauser]

I could see that being traumatizing, but this really isn’t like that. Pip and uv and poetry and the rest don’t fundamentally change how a package is installed into a Python virtualenv. If `uv add foo` works, you could use the equivalent in any of those other tools and get basically the same result. You don’t have to know or care which tool is installing your project because that’s all invisible from inside the code you write.

[philipallstar]

The Javascript tool wars were a lot more emotional and cargo-culty than anything in the Python space I can think of.

[daemonologist]

There is! The company I work for uses a weird version of Azure Devops for <governance> reason, and pip can authenticate and install packages from its artifact feeds while uv cannot. We use uv for development speed (installing internal packages from source) and then switch to pip for production builds.

[kstrauser]

This doesn't work? https://docs.astral.sh/uv/guides/integration/alternative-ind...