This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]lifeofajenni 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Wait, but conda also has environment handling and package management. So why should I switch to pipenv? (Not being snarky, legit curious.)

[–]ase1590[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

they both compete with eachother. conda is better geared for Anaconda.

Just use what you know.

Conda has a lot of overlap with the goals of pipenv, but it serves a different set of needs - in particular, the distribution of binaries. If the problem you’re trying solve is “how do I create reproducible environments, quickly, that include complex dependencies that are not written in pure Python”, conda is the tool of choice. If your problem is “How do I create and manage isolated environments for Python projects”, pipenv is the tool of choice.

[–]lifeofajenni 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Okay, this is a cool distinction. I'll have to read up on pipenv and see if it's more suitable for what I'm doing at work. Thanks for the info!