[prodigal_erik]

> I don't think its worthwhile to compare Go to dynamic languages.

I do think we should be making this comparison, because there's a trend in devops of moving from Python and Ruby (each of which have system-provided dependencies) to Go (which statically links a copy of everything).

I see this as unfortunate because devops should be promoting taking full advantage of the system's well-understood and -tested libraries and services rather than avoiding them with approaches like container isolation. If you have a reason to avoid your distro's python, fix that.

[jgalt212]

You raise a good point. Perhaps I should have said it's a much greater challenge to compare Go to dynamic languages as there are too many moving parts. However, when you constrain the comparison to a specific domain, then the problem is more tractable. I don't have a ton of dev ops experience, so I won't weigh in on this matter. That being said, despite how far Python/pip has come there are still great challenges when installing certain packages. For this reason, I do see the value in statically linked copies of everything--even if it seems like overkill. Disk space is cheap, but does make remote installs take longer.