4 ms·

I concur and I also think that there are too many build backends. pdm is my current favorite package manager. It is fully PEP-compliant and the lockfile genera

I concur and I also think that there are too many build backends. pdm is my current favorite package manager. It is fully PEP-compliant and the lockfile generation is nice. I wouldn't call hatch a package manager because I don't think it can make lockfiles. uv is on my radar but it doesn't look ready for primetime yet. I saw they are building out a package management API with commands such as `uv add` and `uv remove`. Cross-platform lockfiles, editable installs, in-project .venv, and a baked-in build backend might be enough for me to make the switch. It's my pipe dream to get the full build/install/publish workflow down to a single static binary with no dependencies. Anna-Lee Popkes has an awesome comparison of the available package managers [0] complete with handy Venn diagrams. The pyOpenSci team has another nice comparison of the available build backends [1]. [0] https://alpopkes.com/posts/python/packaging_tools/ https://alpopkes.com/posts/python/packaging_tools/ [1] https://www.pyopensci.org/python-package-guide/package-structure-code/python-package-build-tools.html https://www.pyopensci.org/python-package-guide/package-struc...

PrivateButts 2y ago
pdm is my go to as well. I've decided to really jump on the pyproject.toml train and pdm plays very well with it. .venv by default is pretty nice as well. Anything, and I mean anything, is better than pipenv though.
mih 2y ago
Another user of pdm here for professional projects. It sure is more standards compliant than poetry. Support for in-project venvs and integration of configs for packages such as pytest is quite useful. When evaluating package managers, poetry for sure was a contender. However listening to others experiences regarding poetry developers introducing breaking changes that could potentially cause the CI pipeline made it a no go [1]. uv seems to be coming along rather nicely, but wasn't anywhere near the level of stability compared to pdm during the evaluation phase. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gr9o8MW_pb0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gr9o8MW_pb0
- odie5533 2y ago
  Poetry supports in-project venvs. You can enable it globally. https://python-poetry.org/docs/configuration/#virtualenvsin-project https://python-poetry.org/docs/configuration/#virtualenvsin-...

PrivateButts 2y ago

pdm is my go to as well. I've decided to really jump on the pyproject.toml train and pdm plays very well with it. .venv by default is pretty nice as well. Anything, and I mean anything, is better than pipenv though.

mih 2y ago

Another user of pdm here for professional projects. It sure is more standards compliant than poetry. Support for in-project venvs and integration of configs for packages such as pytest is quite useful. When evaluating package managers, poetry for sure was a contender. However listening to others experiences regarding poetry developers introducing breaking changes that could potentially cause the CI pipeline made it a no go [1]. uv seems to be coming along rather nicely, but wasn't anywhere near the level of stability compared to pdm during the evaluation phase. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gr9o8MW_pb0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gr9o8MW_pb0

odie5533 2y ago
Poetry supports in-project venvs. You can enable it globally. https://python-poetry.org/docs/configuration/#virtualenvsin-project https://python-poetry.org/docs/configuration/#virtualenvsin-...