People get so hung up on the version number. These fools would rather use software with tons of bugs and security holes simply because the devs of that software dared to use a version number greater than 1.0.
I see the entire community gravitating towards uv because of its merits. I tried it, and I agree. I already started using it for every project. I’ve even converted older projects to it.
The fact is that language matters, and the version number is a way to communicate the developers’ perception of how suitable something is for use. If they refuse to label it as 1.0, it means either: they don’t think it’s in a stable state yet, or they don’t realize the importance of this type of communication. Either way, it’s a red flag for people who might otherwise be making a large investment in time/money into using something.
It’s not feasible for everyone to do a full evaluation of everything. At some point you need to rely on an expert to at least provide some basic assurances before spending time on digging deeper.
No. I’m speaking in the general sense not to get hung up on an arbitrary number as the sole indicator of whether software is suitable for use in a production environment.
Uv provides no support period of bugfixing for the previous minor release after a breaking change. So if a breaking change does occur, you must immediately update your entire world, test, etc, to continue to receive fixes. (unfortunately the norm for python projects).
This is from their own documentation and release history. I never brought up version numbers before now, only their self-admitted unstable status. Version numbers were brought up by someone of the opinion that uv is stable enough.
Yeah, that's how it is because it is costly for maintainers to maintain.
What's your point though, is poetry better in this regard or what are you suggesting as a better alternative to uv?
if I was asked to deploy python code? My alternative would probably be crying. Personal deployments? I'd probably go with pip hash installs ideally only of wheels, assuming that this would leave the environment in a reproducible state, probably wouldn't though.
pip has the same problem as uv in this regard, but I'd be hoping that there would be less breaking from breaking changes, due to the amount of people depending on pip not breaking.
If I had money? I'd fork pip or uv and assign some people to make an downstream with extended support.
I see the entire community gravitating towards uv because of its merits. I tried it, and I agree. I already started using it for every project. I’ve even converted older projects to it.