3 ms·
Yeah in the debate about dependencies, people often frame it as more dependencies == bad and less dependencies == good. Except more/less dependencies is actuall
by hardwaregeek 5y ago
Yeah in the debate about dependencies, people often frame it as more dependencies == bad and less dependencies == good. Except more/less dependencies is actually more or less explicit dependencies. Fact of the matter is that you need a crazy amount of dependencies to write most modern software. You need ways to handle Unicode, to connect to databases, to write async code, to handle dates, etc.
The question is whether that code is going to come from a monolithic Swiss Army Knife of a library (aka a standard library), a bunch of packages, or some code that everybody copies into their codebase. In which case the packages option doesn't seem so bad. At least they're explicitly versioned, tracked for vulnerabilities and can be updated at a granular level.
- pjmlp 5y agoBecause when working in large corporations one ends up having to write license checker tools and having humans go through those packages, alongside legal, to validate what is allowed to appear on the final product, and to vendor them on the internal package repository.