Oh cool, I’ll definitely look into that.

And honestly, the one I need more is a test group for CI, for things like coverage reporting and whatnot. If I can get that and if having multiple package indexes works properly (i.e. it can check my private repo first, and then pypi), I can probably port our projects to uv, at which point it’s an internal discussion instead of a technical one.

Good call. We have some other tech debt related to our docker usage, so I’ll add this to the list.

I’m not really worried about the migration work, from what I can tell it’s basically just moving a few things around. I’m more worried about losing features the team likes largely for performance reasons.

Our primary use cases are:

• dev tools - standardize versions of tools like black, pylint, etc; not necessary if we move to ruff, we’ll just standardize on a version of that (like we do with poetry today)
• tests - extra deps for CI/CD for things like coverage reports

I like the syntax poetry has, but I’d be willing to use something else, like in PEP 735.

One thing we also need is a way to define additional package repos since we use an internal repo. I didn’t see that called out in the PEP, and I haven’t looked at uv enough to know what their plan is, but this issue seems to be intended to fix it. We specify a specific repo for a handful of packages in each project, and we need that to work as well.

I’m currently looking to use ruff to replace some of our dev tools, and I’ll look back at uv in another release or two to see what the progress is on our blockers.

Yeah, it certainly looks nice, but my problems are:

• everything runs in a docker container locally, so I don’t think the caching is going to be a huge win
• we have a half-dozen teams and a dozen repositories or so, across three time zones, so big changes require a fair amount of effort
• we just got through porting to poetry to split into dependency groups, and going back to not having that is a tough sell

So for me, it needs to at least have feature parity w/ poetry to seriously consider.

Looks like it has basic support:

• required-python = "..."
• dependencies = [ ... ]

Once it gets dependency groups, I’ll try it out. I’m currently using poetry, which works, but I’m always interested in better perf.

We’re using poetry and it solves our problems. I’ll have to look into uv, but I don’t feel in any rush to switch away from poetry.

Really? That’s so odd, I thought as long as you’re not running an exit node, you should be fine. TIL, I’ll have to check my ISP’s policies before setting one up then.

Yeah, 100M is a no-go for me since my ISP provides much more than 100M, and streaming full-res videos would bottleneck that pretty quick.

1G is probably fine for us, but we’ll probably go 2.5G minimum the next time I need to swap out switches, maybe 10G.

Yeah, I trust Mikrotik much more than Trendnet, though I’m happy to use Trendnet for internal switches.

the manufacture published a firmware patch for before any public disclosure was made

They were pretty quick for the stable branch, so I guess the miss is prioritizing it for LTS. But if it’s just the one time, I’m completely fine with that.

Do be aware that Backblaze drive access patterns will probably be quite different from yours. So if there’s a really good deal on something with a bit higher failure rate, but your usage pattern is pretty tame, it may be worth taking the gamble.

But at least you mean well.

I don’t think you even need to try very hard…

One that I wasn’t sure about asked about a NAS. It seemed the question was about dedicated NAS devices, and I built my own NAS (desktop PC + drives + btrfs + samba, etc).

I answered “no,” but I think it would be interesting to capture that distinction in the next one. I.e. Do you use a NAS product?

• Yes (commercial)
• Yes (DIY)
• No

And then a follow-up about what that NAS offers (i.e. just NAS stuff, or can it host apps?).

Then you’re all clear.

I personally want my Jellyfin to be on the WAN, and I have certain devices on my internal network VPN’d to my VPS, which exposes the services I want to access remotely. But if you don’t need that, using the local addr in your DNS config totally works. Getting TLS certs will be complicated, but you don’t need that anyway if everything is local or over a VPN.

I suppose, but then you’re kind of screwed if you want to access Jellyfin outside of your network. I suppose you could use a VPN, but it’s probably easier to just not use the Chromecast (or just accept that it’s going to hit the WAN regardless).

Can confirm, I do this as well for my local services (especially important for Jellyfin), I just point my local DNS server at my local IP and everything works perfectly.

He has cheaper ones too, so check around the shop and find one that fits your requirements.

Good point, I’ll consider MOCA. The main problem is that we have three sets (OTA antenna, satellite, and internet), and I’m not sure which are which, but figuring that out should be quite a bit easier than running cable. :)

I’m not planning on getting anything more than gigabit in the near future, though my city is rolling out fiber and claims to support up to 10gbit.

Yeah, I don’t understand why JBOD with a decent chipset is so hard to find. I really don’t expect much from it, I just want to slide some drives in and have everything run consistently for a few months at a time. I’ll power cycle periodically to apply updates, so I’m not looking for 24/7/365 operation or anything.

FWIW, Level1Techs seems to recommend MediaSonic (timestamp is where he talks about reliability), but doesn’t give it a ringing endorsement. And that was one of the better ones he’s seen…

After a bunch of research, what I’ve found is:

• okay chipset, but garbage build quality (no dampening for drives, no hot-swap, etc)
• fancy controller that doesn’t support JBOD - non-starter for me, I don’t want anything to do with hw controllers
• expensive - at a certain point, I’ll just keep my oversized ATX case that does the job

Now I’m looking for compact cases that support 5 drives, like this one (a little too cheap perhaps?) or this one. It just seems reliable 4-5 bay USB-C enclosures just aren’t that popular.