< Back

---

🐍 Python Package Management in 2026: uv, Poetry or pip?

If you're still using pip install and requirements.txt in 2026, you're leaving serious productivity on the table. The Python packaging landscape has evolved dramatically and today, developers have three powerful options: the newcomer uv, the mature Poetry or the trusty (but aging) pip. Which should you choose?

⚡ Meet uv: Rust-Powered Speed

Launched by Astral (the same team behind Ruff), uv is written in Rust and redefines what "fast" means for Python package management:

• 10-100x faster than pip for resolving and installing dependencies
• Unified toolchain: Single binary replaces pip, pip-tools, virtualenv and even manages Python versions
• Universal lock files: Cross-platform reproducible builds with uv.lock
• Workspace support: Monorepo-friendly with multiple packages

# Install uv
curl -LsSf https://astral.sh/uv/install.sh | sh

# Create project + venv instantly
uv init my-project && cd my-project
uv add requests fastapi

# Lock and sync across teams
uv sync  # Reads uv.lock, installs exact versions

🎭 Poetry: The Mature Contender

Poetry has been the darling of Python packaging since 2018 and for good reason:

• Elegant CLI: poetry add, poetry build, poetry publish , intuitive commands
• pyproject.toml native: Embraced the PEP 518/621 standards early
• Lock file reliability: poetry.lock ensures reproducible installs
• Vast ecosystem support: Works with private PyPI, Git dependencies, extras

# Classic Poetry workflow
poetry new my-project
cd my-project
poetry add requests@^2.31.0
poetry install  # Creates venv + installs

🔧 pip: The Baseline (But Show Your Work)

pip isn't going anywhere, it's the default and every Python installation includes it. But in 2026, using pip alone signals one of three things:

1. You maintain legacy systems (valid)
2. You haven't evaluated modern alternatives (opportunity cost)
3. You prefer explicit over convenient (respectable, but slow)

With pip-tools, you can achieve lock files and dependency resolution, but it's two tools instead of one and still slower than Poetry or uv.

📊 The Decision Matrix

Feature	uv	Poetry	pip
Speed	⚡⚡⚡	⚡⚡	⚡
Lock files	✅	✅	❌ (pip-tools only)
Python version mgmt	✅ Built-in	❌ (use pyenv)	❌
Maturity/stability	Rapid evolution	Battle-tested	Rock solid
Learning curve	Low	Medium	Low

🎯 My 2026 Recommendation

For new projects → Use uv. The speed advantage compounds daily. A developer switching from pip to uv saves 15-30 seconds per dependency operation, multiply by 50 operations/day × 250 work days = 50+ hours saved annually.

For complex, stable projects → Poetry remains excellent. If your team has workflows built around Poetry and everything works, the migration cost may exceed the uv benefit.

For legacy maintenance → pip is fine. Don't fix what isn't broken, but evaluate uv for your next greenfield project.

🚀 Migrating from pip/venv (or from Perl's CPAN!)

If you're transitioning from another language ecosystem (yes, fellow Perl refugees, I see you 👀), uv offers the lowest-friction entry:

# One-time: migrate existing requirements.txt
uv pip compile requirements.txt -o uv.lock

# Or: start fresh with modern structure
uv init --python 3.13
uv add -r requirements.txt  # Auto-converts

Coming from Perl's CPAN? uv's "single binary, zero config" philosophy will feel familiar, like cpanm but with lock files and automatic virtual environments.

🔗 Resources

• uv Documentation , Comprehensive guide with migration paths
• Poetry Docs , For the full-featured approach
• pip Documentation , The baseline reference

Bottom line: In 2026, Python packaging is finally pleasant. Pick uv for speed, Poetry for maturity or pip for legacy. But whatever you do, use lock files. Your teammates (and future you) will thank you. 🐍🔒

---

< Back