Frictionless dependencies sounds lovely, but it's not the right goal.

it''s not an equivalent problem to 'making development easier'. It's orthogonal. Maybe it's a more tempting false equivalence if your base tooling has a lot of cracks? Maybe not.

You do have to shave a lot of corners right down to get a square peg to fit into a round hole though

Follow

Dependencies are maybe the hardest part of software development. Building tools to foster a culture where "you shouldn't have to worry about them" has some key problems

- if you buy into this mythology, you're going to see a population explosion of libraries.

- also, you have a cadre of software builders who are comfortable building software icebergs - where the majority of the infrastructure is submerged, obscure and potentially dangerous.

"As few dependencies as is reasonable", should be high on your priorities list.

But what's reasonable? Well, quite. That's in the sector of the Venn labelled 'Art' , not the one labelled 'Science'. Below the mid point, closer to the boundary of 'Craft'.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!