[cookieperson]

Cool I am glad there are more people using it in production these days, it will help the language become more stable. I've deployed Julia to production a few times now. In almost every case it was rewritten in another language within a year for one reason or another... This is sad, but, for being a v1 language, it never lost it's "early adopter" experience for myself or my colleagues.

I've seen minor releases in Julia break essential packages. Not like it was one time either. So where did I get the idea, personal hands on experience.

Again it's great if you have a script and want to run it, anything beyond that, in my experience, results in a lot of turmoil and erosion. Almost wonder if it's a flaw in the language itself or, the maintenance model of the packages. Oh well not my problem

[sundarurfriend]

> I've seen minor releases in Julia break essential packages.

Any specific examples of this happening in Julia 1.0 or later?

[cookieperson]

Absolutely, a minor change to Julia base broke the CSV package for weeks. But that's like 1 of hundreds of examples. I don't think non package developers realize how much effort package maintainers and drive-by contributors do to keep that language alive.

[sundarurfriend]

Would you happen to remember the specific version, or links to any of the other examples? I ask because I've repeatedly heard that every release is tested against the entirety of the (public) package ecosystem, so I'm curious how these snuck through - whether it was before such a system was put in place (maybe because of these breakages), or whether things still sneak through the tests to such a degree.

[cookieperson]

I don't remember, maybe check closed issues in their repository. But I think we all know why you're really saying this. To cast doubt on what I'm saying. That's okay, gotta get that $$$ or something.