sweng

Sure If that happens. But it may also not. Which is actually usually the case. Sure, it's not 100% safe, but it is safer.

How can you be sure it's one line of code? What if there are several codepaths, and venvs are activated in different places? And in any case, even if there is only one conditional needed, that is still one branch more than necessary to test.

Your symlink example does not make sense. There is someting that is changing. In fact, it may even be the opposite: if you need to use file A in s container, and file B otherwise, it may make perfect sense to symlink the correct file to C, so thst your code does not need to care about it.

Upgrading the base image does not imply updating your python, and even updating your python does not imply updating your python packages (except for the standard libraries, of course).

But then it’s easy to just check an environment variable and skip, if inside Docker.

How is forcing your script to be Docker-aware simpler than just always creating a venv?

It's a bit unclear to me what you refer to with "their argument". What argument exactly?

Is Yubico actually claiming it is more secure by not being open source?

I'm really confused why serverless is mentioned at all. If you don't need serverless, just don't use serverless. Writing about a "serverless tax" is silly. For some usecases serverless makes sense, for others not. Maybe the article should offer guidence on this, before suggesting a "solution" which may not be a solution at all.

Isn't that the point of the article? It's not open-source currently, but will be, once the AGPL option is added.

There's no need to argue. We can just check what the Ukrainian position is. As Ukraine has been invaded by Russia at least 3 times within the last 150 years, it means no proof is needed (by your logic).

It's unclear to me what happens if two countries have been invaded 3 times, but tell different stories. Do we believe the one that has been invaded more in that case?

Ukraine fights Russia. "But what about US nuclear brinkmanship in completely different places?"

Would you BTW answer how many times one needs tp be invaded until one should be blindly trusted? I'm truly curious. You mentioned 3 times in 150 years. Is that more or less it?

Holy whataboutism indeed. In a war between Ukraine and Russia, we are supposed to blindly believe Russia, because the US is doing bad stuff with nukes in a differen part of the world?

BTW, after how many invasions does one get the "everyone must believe what I say" card? I mean, Ukraine has also been invaded a few times now.

Well, if the owner's word is enough as evidence on it's own, Russia has committed quite a bit of warcrimes in Ukraine. Will be interesting to see how they could possibly weasel out of a conviction considering the rock-solid "trust-me bro" evidence also provided by Ukraine.

Maybe one should not blindly trust the word of one of the warring parties?