4 ms·
Not OP, but I honestly think that these kinds of devs are just way too opinionated and don't want to accept the 95% valid existing solution. In a healthy ecosys
by zo1 2y ago
Not OP, but I honestly think that these kinds of devs are just way too opinionated and don't want to accept the 95% valid existing solution. In a healthy ecosystem, people can try and experiment and if something is awesome then people would naturally switch to it over time.
Sadly what happens now is that everyone under the sun tries to evangelise and "create content" for these new tools so much that the natural filter mechanisms don't work. Doubly-so because tools like Google effectively created a new fitness function for peoples' behavior that incentivizes just plain old content creation (whatever weird form it may take, including new libraries being created + promoted).
- maleldil 2y agoIMO, there's a direct line of improvement between pipenv, poetry, (briefly) rye and now uv. I think the ecosystem is improving over time and will eventually coalesce around a majority platform. I like uv, but I'm unsure if that will be the final product. Beyond just tool names, it's also important to realise that there has been a significant movement from the Python development team to standardise aspects of tooling. Tools like Poetry and uv weren't possible a few years ago before there was pyproject.toml to unify a bunch of separate things, for example.
- TZubiri 2y agoI don't know I don't care. I just use pip. If I need to virtualize I just do so at che OS or Kernel level. At any rate I take care of all of my python installs by not downloading a gazillion of random packages online, if I ever reach the situation where package 517 depends on package 208 and package 598 depends on a different version of package 208, I'll just pull out the FlemmenWerfer and trash the whole thing before it reproduces.