one of the interesting things in this video is that Facebook pretty much invented an equivalent of Flatpak/Zeroinstall/Click-packages to deploy their python apps.
It's actually not super hard, Unix has pretty good support for this, and a lot of companies have something like this internally. The gulf between "good enough for a company" and "good enough for the world" is pretty huge.
Plus, the extent to which people can't do this because they have no/have a terrible build system is generally underestimated.
I've had great success using pex to bundle up tools that use a few dependencies. It's a lot simpler than tools that try to bundle a full python distribution.
I wonder why someone hasn't built a simple loader for Windows that wraps pex in an exe with pythonxy.dll. You'd pretty much solve distribution of Python scripts on Windows.
The speaker says, "dependencies are associated with the application (as they should be) rather than with the system"
That's certainly a practical strategy, but it reduces flexibility/modularity. Go-lang shares the same strategy for deployment. Perhaps it was inspired by Java-users.
There's good and bad there, if you need to patch a security vulnerability you may need to redeploy tons of packages on each host (each package that contains a copy of the bad lib code) versus patching it once. Depending on how you deploy that might be no big deal or it might be.
Then again, patching it 'once' usually involves restarting all processes that are dynamically linked anyway (and really hoping that it loads the new lib). If deployment is fully automated and scales well, the only painful thing is the restart to begin with :)
