geospatial-data-lake VS conda

One option is to trust on first use, checksum the installation script and at least casually verify the diff each time the checksum changes[1].

Pros:

- Protects against simple hijacking.

- Reproducible as long as the installer doesn't also call out to a moving target, such as example.com/releases/latest.

Cons:

- Build breaks as soon as the installer is bumped. If it's bumped often (or just before an important release) this can cause pain.

- TOFU may not be acceptable, but of course you could review the code thoroughly before even the first use.

[1] https://github.com/linz/geostore/blob/b3cd162605109da8a3a688...

I'd recommend a project from work, Geostore[1]. Highlights:

- 100% test coverage (with some typical exceptions like `if __name__ == "__main__":` blocks)

- Randomises test sequence and inputs reproducibly

- Passes Pylint with max McCabe complexity of 6

- Passes `mypy --strict`

- Formatted using Black and isort

[1] https://github.com/linz/geostore

The current work project[1] has all of these: Pyenv, Poetry, Pytest, pytest-cov with 100% branch coverage, pre-commit, Pylint rather than Flake8, Black, mypy (with a stricter configuration than recommended here), and finally isort. These are all super helpful.

There's also a simpler template repo[2] with almost all of these.

[1] https://github.com/linz/geostore/

[2] https://github.com/linz/template-python-hello-world

As someone who's used CDK for a few months and never handcoded CF, that sounds completely correct. If you're comfortable with Python, here's a simple but non-trivial architecture you can check out: https://github.com/linz/geospatial-data-lake/blob/master/app....

Python's venv module is officially recommended for creating virtual environments since Python 3.5 comes packaged with your Python installation. While there still are additional older tools available, such as conda and virtualenv, if you are new to virtual environments, it is best to use venv now.

conda's dependency solver solves a harder problem than pip's. This quote alludes to it "Conda will never be as fast as pip, so long as we're doing real environment solves and pip satisfies itself only for the current operation." (from https://github.com/conda/conda/issues/7239). Thus mamba was created to improve performance and now conda is bringing in that performance boost.

The other challenge I ran into sometimes was that if I was running a lower memory/storage Codespace instance, when I tried to use Conda from the command line to modify environments, the process would be killed after a few seconds. This turns out to be related to some performance issues Conda has that make it consume a lot of memory when trying to work with the conda-forge installation channel. You can always then just increase the size of the Codespace your are working with (just go to your Codespaces list and use the triple dots to change the settings for a Codespace).

It's worth noting that [ana]conda isn't even fully compatible yet with 3.11 (you can use it to create 3.11 environments--and you really should rather than waiting on relying on the system python--but conda itself can only run on 3.10.

It took some time but as great Christmas present Miniconda was finally released with Python 3.10!

The September update broke it.

According to this this issue is high on their priority list (whatever that means).