Re:2026: The Year of Java in the Terminal
by myko on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @01:03PM
(#46446596)
I know Python has been big in the space for longer than uv's existence, but uv (https://docs.astral.sh/uv/) has made Python packaging dead simple to me
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:2026: The Year of Java in the Terminal
by CamouflagedKiwi on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @01:45PM
(#46446985)
I don't think uv makes distribution simple? Unless I've missed something, it doesn't do anything out of the box to help you produce a standalone artifact - it builds wheels but those are only useful for a user that already has python and pip, and don't do anything to deal with Python version drift etc.
Re:2026: The Year of Java in the Terminal
by gegtik on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @01:53PM
(#46447068)
uv can install a version of python of your choosing in addition to pulling the specific versions of libraries specified in your lockfile. it's extremely dummy-resistant.
Re:2026: The Year of Java in the Terminal
by CamouflagedKiwi on Thursday January 01, 2026 @08:48AM
(#46454089)
Right, but that means the end user has to have (or install) uv, and then you ship them all your code, and then they can use uv to run that. That's a development workflow - and exactly what I meant when I said that uv didn't solve distribution in the way a language like Go or Rust does by producing a single binary.
Re:2026: The Year of Java in the Terminal
by maxandersen on Thursday January 01, 2026 @09:42AM
(#46454496)
uv does not solve all problems - but it for sure greatly improves chance of python tools working.
jbang is to java, what uv(x) is to python and what npm/npmx is to javascript.