Support for uv Backend?

[andrew-saydjari]

I have been a loyal CondaPkg.jl user for a while, and I love that I can use MicroMamba (and pip as needed) for the package resolution. I have recently gotten a lot of recommendations for https://github.com/astral-sh/uv to do the package resolution. Are there any thoughts/plans on adding this as a package resolution manager here (or elsewhere)?

[cjdoris]

It's already optionally supported - if you have uv as a dependency in any CondaPkg.toml file then it will be used instead of pip to install any pip dependencies.

I'm considering making it always use uv, with an option to choose pip instead.

[andrew-saydjari]

Amazing! Happy to close the issue or leave it open as a placeholder to get this fact into the documentation (which I don't think is there, unless I missed it).

[cjdoris]

You can now control this behaviour with the pip_backend preference - see the readme. It is uv by default now. Will appear in the next release.

[andrew-saydjari]

I just want to note that in during the runtest in this CI, test, the install from the CondaPkg.jl proceeds via micromamba. Is this unavoidable since we need to do at least one mamba/conda run to get pip/uv? I also will note that it downloaded pip rather than uv, which confused me based on the above discussion, but I am probably missing something in my CI set up?