Hacker News Reader

Comment by kardianos | Hacker News Reader

Package managers should not intentionally expose users to new versions without explicit action.

Go modules did different then npm, and I argue Go modules did it correctly.

Until the opposite happens. Some big security hole is fixed in the dependency, npm gets the fixed version by default while Go is stuck in the tested unsecure version. Or Go mitigates the somehow?

Go doesn't mitigate that somehow. You get the code that you specify, not the code that someone else has decided is better.

In practice, for both npm and Go dependencies, you'll get a Dependabot PR that upgrades the dependency for you. Obviously that is Github-specific, so if you're on a different platform, you'll have to subscribe to security updates in some other way. I am guessing there are many services that you can subscribe to that do the same thing.

Some big security hole is introduced in one of thousands of dependencies, npm gets the insecure version on next npm install while Go is stuck in the tested secure version. How difficult is that to see? I'm not the one to believe in conspiracy theories but this is just nuts.

Until the secure version is tested, as it should be for anything you deploy to production.

I'm not sure why you think deploying untested updates is a good idea?

I agree that Go made the right call with MVS. It's a nice compromise between pinning and fetching the latest version of everything.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com