It's not that Django has/had any reputation for those things -- it's that Django had no reputation at all since it was a nascent project with no track record. T

It's not that Django has/had any reputation for those things -- it's that Django had no reputation at all since it was a nascent project with no track record. That means it had no proof points for being stable or secure. At the time I adopted it (~Nov 2005), the public release of the Django project was only a few months old, and indeed breaking changes followed soon after (the so-called "magic removal branch"). As I recall, there were also various template escaping security issues at that time. > Also, how on Earth did the ML PhDs decide physically segregated databases for each user were a requirement? I worked at several labs at top academic institutions, on everything from supercomputer MPI work for multi-agent sims to image pipelines for large weather simulations, and one thing I learned is that being a good coder is orthogonal to being a good researcher. In that particular case, the person who wrote the code made the assumption that the "customers" would not allow their sensor data to be stored alongside the data from other customers, and separate databases with separate passwords was the solution they came up with. Somehow they did not notice that the terrible ergonomics of this solution meant there was probably a better way. Once I ripped out MySQL in favor of Postgres (since it had proper security) and removed the cumbersome middleware layer performance improved by over 100x.