That’s just the same “my pip is too slow” problem which some people don’t have.
I work in a place with 200 developers, and 99% of pip usage is in automated jobs that last an hour. Shaving a couple seconds off that will not provide any tangible benefit. However moving 200 people from a tool they know to one they don’t comes at a rather significant cost.
> Shaving a couple seconds off that will not provide any tangible benefit.
It could be more than that.
I switched from pip to uv today in a Dockerized project with 45 total dependencies (top level + sub-dependencies included).
pip takes 38 seconds and uv takes 3 seconds, both uncached. A 10x+ difference is massive and if uv happens to be better suited to run on multiple cores it could be even more because my machine is a quad core i5 3.20ghz from 10 years ago.
> I work in a place with 200 developers
In your case, if you have 200 developers spending an hour on builds that could in theory be reduced down to 5 minutes per build. That's 11,000 minutes or 183 hours of dev time saved per 1 build. I know you say it's automated but someone is almost always waiting for something right?
For what it's worth uv is fully compatible with pip. just replace 'pip --foo bar' with 'uv pip --foo bar'. One project I'm working on is 100% 'classic' pip based with no plans of moving, but I still use uv when working on it as it is completely transparent. Uv manages my venvs and python versions and makes things like switching between different versions of python and libraries much smoother, and I can still use the same pip commands as everybody else, it's just that all my pip commands run faster.
* uv makes some design choices that aren't always strictly compatible with the spec
* uv correctly implements the spec and it turns out pip, or the underlying library, didn't (I have worked on fixing a couple of these on the pip side)
* uv doesn't support legacy features still in pip
* Tool specific features or exact output diverge
This is not a criticism, but I've seen some users get irate with uv because they were under the impression that it was making much stronger compatibility guarantees.
