Suggest to use conda and miniforge instead of mamba and mambaforge #1653
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Back in time when we started using conda (~2020/2021?), the conda tool was extremely slow, and that is the reason why mamba was developed, and why we suggested everyone to use mamba. Similarly, we suggested to install mambaforge as a distribution instead of miniforge3, as mambaforge contained by default. See #847 for the related PR.
Since those days, a lot of changed. conda has been updated to use the mamba solver, and so it has become much faster and more and less as fast as mamba . This is true that as long as you have a recent enough
conda
, to verify that check that the commands conda config --show solver returns solver: libmamba, see https://www.anaconda.com/blog/a-faster-conda-for-a-growing-community .For this reason, several things has started to change:
So, also in view of the conda/pixi training that I eventually need to do and to reduce the confusion of users, I have the intention to start recommending the use of conda (in place of mamba) and miniforge3 (in place of mambaforge) everywhere in our docs, and this PR is the first step in that direction.