3 ms·

It’s beyond disappointing that the article does not discuss conda and conda’s build variant capabilities [0]. Maybe 2 years ago there was still room for honest

• phowon 8y ago
  As someone who aggressively uses conda, I do think one of its downsides is how heavy it is. I agree that it's a good one-stop-shop if you want to get an environment up and running with no issues. But if you're not doing any scientific computing for a given project, it might help to use something more lightweight.
  • mlthoughts2018 8y ago
    I use it with good success managing non-scientific and non-Python packages. I think especially with conda-forge, it is just an all purpose package manager and package distributor. Using the miniconda installer often helps keep it lightweight too, no need for Anaconda in many use cases.
  • lsorber 8y ago
    What makes conda heavy?
  • nirse 8y ago
    I've had to 'debug' quite a few (ana)conda setups, mostly ones that were used for scientific work, where the whole python setup got so messed up that nothing was quite working anymore, both system and conda pythons. I advise against it.
    • slfnflctd 8y ago
      > the whole python setup got so messed up that nothing was quite working anymore, both system and conda pythons This seems like the biggest downside I've seen mentioned thus far. Can you (or anyone) offer more detail as to how using Conda resulted in corrupting your Python installation? It it similar to what can happen with game mods, or is there something else going on?
    • mlthoughts2018 8y ago
      This sounds highly implausible, since conda’s number one mode of operation will fully isolate system dependencies into separate environments. It is extremely difficult to misuse conda in a way that would cause this problem, which makes me believe this comment is just trolling.
      • nirse 8y ago
        Sorry, no trolling here. The times I've tried to fix the setups I've lost my patience with it and IIRC got things back working by deleting conda and installing packages through manually homebrew (all Macs). But it wasn't on my machine, so I'm not sure how they got into that state. I think it was due to using a wide range of IDE's/environments that all tried to manage their own packages and load paths, combined with perhaps some manual setup. Probably Conda is fine if you just commit to it, but I think the users who got into these messes weren't knowledgable enough to oversee the consequences of their actions. So you could argue that the problem isn't with conda, but with the users. However, it seems that for naive users the consequences of using conda aren't clear (enough), which can get them into a mess.
        • mlthoughts2018 8y ago
          The situation you describe would be actively difficult for new users to create in conda, based on some of the “idiot proof” defaults conda uses and the wide range of other tools (especially pip and native system packages) that the conda developers have made to “just work” in the easiest, out of the box ways.
        • kalefranz 8y ago
          Hi! I was the conda dev lead for 2.5 years. We work really hard to make sure conda does the Right Thing in unpredictable, almost hostile, environments. It’s a large surface area to guard against, but in general we’ve been incredibly successful. I hate to hear that you had a bad experience. If it’s at all possible, please provide something on our issue tracker (github.com/conda/conda) we can replicate and write regression tests against. Help us improve on what we’ve missed.
• throwaway5752 8y ago
  "Maybe 2 years ago there was still room for honest debate among Python package tooling. There just sincerely isn’t anymore." That is way out of line. I'm not going to try to talk you out of conda, but for the benefit of anyone reading your comment who doesn't know better I have to point out that your opinion is far from universal.
  • mlthoughts2018 8y ago
    It’s sincerely not out of line. You can still use pip to install within conda environments, yet conda packaging just supersedes other approaches. Of particular inportance is the unambiguous failure of pipfile/pipenv and similar approaches. I’ve been working day in and day out with packaging and environments in Python for 12 years, and nothing has come close to being as serious of a general solution as conda. I count my blessings every day I get to use it, remembering the bad old days with Python’s native packaging, wheels & eggs, and then also the pipfile / pipenv mess.
    • deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    • Sean1708 8y ago
      > unambiguous failure of pipfile/pipenv and similar approaches. How have those approaches failed?
      • mlthoughts2018 8y ago
        Here is but one discussion out of the numerous discussions refuting pipenv, - https://chriswarrick.com/blog/2018/07/17/pipenv-promises-a-lot-delivers-very-little/ https://chriswarrick.com/blog/2018/07/17/pipenv-promises-a-l...
        • throwaway5752 8y ago
          "I haven’t tried it, but I consider Conda/Anaconda unnecessary for most use-cases. Most stuff that used to be difficult to compile/install should now be available as PyPI wheels for multiple platforms." https://chriswarrick.com/blog/2018/07/17/pipenv-promises-a-lot-delivers-very-little/#isso-178 https://chriswarrick.com/blog/2018/07/17/pipenv-promises-a-l... That is the author of that blog post, replying to a comment there.
• linuxftw 8y ago
  Maybe Windows and Mac users use conda? In the linux world, it's distro-provided python + pip & venv.
  • hogu 8y ago
    It's more skewed by scientific computing vs not
  • sgillen 8y ago
    I use conda for everything now, Linux included.
  • mlthoughts2018 8y ago
    In linux world, conda is the best choice. Here was an interesting take on it, https://wesmckinney.com/blog/conda-forge-centos-moment/ https://wesmckinney.com/blog/conda-forge-centos-moment/