What additional overhead is cut out by the netkit approach?
https://isovalent.com/blog/post/cilium-netkit-a-new-containe...
Dead Comment
It is no small feat to create compatibility for modern Python features like type hints and async in a library that has its roots in Python 2, it has absolutely exceeded expectations in that regard.
the uv support on workspaces (virtual and concrete) has me intrigued.
> "Making light of sensitive topics like workplace sexual harassment, which could be interpreted as harassment or creating an unwelcoming environment." > "Casually mentioning scenarios involving sexual abuse, which may be inappropriate or triggering for some audiences."
In which scenario would these topics even come up when people discuss Python? I can't imagine anyone talking about these things in a professional workplace outside exceptional situations. This just seems very weird to me.
https://discuss.python.org/t/for-your-consideration-proposed...
And then a public warning
https://discuss.python.org/t/inclusive-communications-expect...
What’s the most common cause of builds taking this long in the first place…
Worst I have ever had was 5 minutes, but subsequent builds were reduced to under a minute due to build cache, creating multi-stage builds, and keeping the layers thin and optimizing the .dockerignore
I can understand why people would prefer FAANG & Co. weren't re-selling their FOSS, but I don't see how you can pick and choose who has access to and is allowed to run your code, and still be open source. Maybe you could have an application process, where you decide to give a license on a case-by-case basis, that can be rescinded later. But I'm not confident you'd get much traction.
The OP's point is that product owners want the benefits of being open source, but are frustrated with the downsides. You can't have one without the other, they are two sides of the same coin.