I am not sure how you got this conclusion from the article.

> So let's handle the hell manually to feel the pain better

This is far from my position. Literally the entire point is to make it clearer you are heading to dependency hell, rather than feel the pain better whilst you are there.

I am not against dependencies but you should know the costs of them and the alternatives. Package managers hide the complexity, costs, trade-offs, and alternative approaches, thus making it easier to slip into dependency hell.

▲

adev_ 4 days ago | parent [-]

> I am not against dependencies but you should know the costs of them and the alternatives.

You are against the usage of a tool and you propose no alternative.

Handling the dependency by vendoring them manually, like you propose in your blog, is not an alternative.

This is an over simplification of the problem (and the problem is complex) that can be applied only to your specific usage and domain.

	▲	gingerBill 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		It is an alternative, just clearly not one you like. And it's not an oversimplification of the problem. Again, what is wrong with saying you should know the costs of the dependencies you include AND the alternative approaches of not using the dependencies?—e.g. using the standard library, writing it yourself, using another dependency already that might fit, etc.