35
A plea not to use uv-build for Python (blogs.gentoo.org)
submitted 4 days ago by to c/python@programming.dev
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

@mgorny@treehouse.systems:

After seeing yet another dozen packages lose keywords on Gentoo because of a single key dependency switching to uv-build, I would like to plea on behalf of Gentoo users: please don’t use uv-build as a build backend.

Just to be clear, this is not about uv itself or any other Astral tools; these are good tools with a nice and responsive upstream. The uv-build backend is one thing we have to disagree on. I’m not saying it’s bad; I’m saying that its benefits don’t outweigh the drawbacks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I absolutely would say that to a billionaire, because they aren't paying me.

My boss, have said it a number of times. I've almost verbatim told them that their use case doesn't line up with our broader user bases' use case, and that I wasn't going to support it. Part of a healthy working relationship is being able to push back.

Ignoring my specific case though, what is your point? That people with power shouldn't ever face push back? Surely that's not your point?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    Believe it or not, my point was exactly what I said it was; without subtext. Fwiw, the reason I made it is that not supporting older systems is something peoole tend to do to appease the commercial interests of their employers, and the broader and higher classes of employers. Imo, it sounds more like you told your boss that their strategy didn't align with their own interests than what you said to the quote in question.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 child)

    There are other good reasons to not support older systems, beyond commercial interests.

    Every additional system that is supported comes with a cost of time and effort. When the system is rare (SPARC), continuing to support it doesnt make sense, especially when that time and effort can be put towards maintaining other more common systems.

    Also, supporting older systems can hold back new technology. Most Linux distros are built with an ancient minimum x86 version, which means that many of the modern CPUs aren't being optimised for. Its good for compatibility, but it is holding back new systems. Every Ubuntu/fedora/etc release their respective steering committees will usually have a discussion about dropping older CPU support. Gentoo at least has a solution for that, because everything is recompiled for the specific system.

    IMO, if their system is so resource constrained that 1.5mb is too much to bear, they're well into the "holding everyone else back" territory, 128GB SSDs are 40AUD, which is two big Mac meals. And if they are on SPARC, thats well into the rarity territory, the last SPARC CPU was released in 2017, and they were never common for consumer PCs.

    There is a difference between "planned obsolecence" and actual obsolecence, and this case feels like the later.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago

    The additional work doesn't go away when you add support for higher end systems that most can't afford to use, let alone want to.

    This premise, that progress requires abandon, is taken for granted because of commercial interests.

    If people were as interesting in maintaining their projects as they were in riding the new wave, there'd really be no issue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent