Ambiguity in whether to use `actions/setup-python`

[CarrotManMatt]

The first answer to the FAQs on this project's README suggests not to use actions/setup-python and to instead make use of uv managed Python installations.

This is in contrast the the official uv documentation about integration with GitHub workflows, which suggests to make use of actions/setup-python for a performance benefit due to the python executables being cached alongside GitHub's runners.

Please could some clarification be made either as a response in this issue, an amendment to the FAQ on the README or a change to uv's documentation to clarify whether or not actions/setup-python has any benefits or is made redundant by this project.

Many thanks.

[eifinger]

Yes the documentations don't match up. I will fix that. In the meantime: It is perfectly fine to use actions/setup-python and might even save ~1s. But for most usecases you don't have to use it. I will make that more clear in the documentation.

[ulgens]

To clarify the context for anyone reading it a year later,

I think

This is in contrast the the official uv documentation about integration with GitHub workflows, which suggests to make use of actions/setup-python for a performance benefit due to the python executables being cached alongside GitHub's runners.

refers to https://docs.astral.sh/uv/guides/integration/github/