Re:Using uv and PEP 723 for Self-Contained Python Scripts
by frfl on Thursday March 27, 2025 @10:38PM
(#43500887)
Seems like you're dismissing the uv single file setup approach without fully understanding it. I'd recommend giving it a try. It's indeed simpler and snappier than any other package manager to date.
Re:Using uv and PEP 723 for Self-Contained Python Scripts
by stickfu on Friday March 28, 2025 @12:39PM
(#43507411)
Python is fun again!! Omg it’s like when I first started with python before I knew all the pitfalls that were coming. Uv just makes it work again(unaware of all uv pitfalls atm, don’t spoil it for me yet:)
Re:Using uv and PEP 723 for Self-Contained Python Scripts
by dagenix on Friday March 28, 2025 @12:47PM
(#43507490)
I'm not dismissing uv, I'm critiquing the article.
Re:Using uv and PEP 723 for Self-Contained Python Scripts
by GolDDranks on Thursday March 27, 2025 @10:53PM
(#43500997)
A package manager that is a quick and snappy binary that doesn't need a big runtime, unlike most of the Python tools.
Re:Using uv and PEP 723 for Self-Contained Python Scripts
by zahlman on Saturday March 29, 2025 @07:59PM
(#43519856)
What exactly is your standard for "big"?
$ du ~/.local/pipx/venvs/uv/bin/uv | cut -f 1
38812
Stripped and dynamically linked, BTW. Compare the system-provided Python: $ du /usr/bin/python3.12 | cut -f 1
7832
(But also, if you hope not to pay the cost of a Python runtime, what is your remaining use case for uv?)
And yet, the rest of the article is about uv. According to uv itself:
> An extremely fast Python package and project manager, written in Rust.
It's a package manager!