1) I've only loved them, to recover failing disks and broken systems (i.e. a statically linked ddrescue)
2) I think it goes against the general Linux architecture (i.e. it multiplies the number of needed upgrades on a vulnerability/bug announcement, this is, you need to upgrade each "Go" tool used by the "sysadmin", if there is 2, 2 upgrades, if there is 134, 134 upgrades, on each server).
3) I'm aware it's a solution to certain issues (i.e. dependency problems), when proper solutions are not available (paranoid component control, local mirrors of all the stack, CI, staging environments, etc)
1) I've only loved them, to recover failing disks and broken systems (i.e. a statically linked ddrescue)
2) I think it goes against the general Linux architecture (i.e. it multiplies the number of needed upgrades on a vulnerability/bug announcement, this is, you need to upgrade each "Go" tool used by the "sysadmin", if there is 2, 2 upgrades, if there is 134, 134 upgrades, on each server).
3) I'm aware it's a solution to certain issues (i.e. dependency problems), when proper solutions are not available (paranoid component control, local mirrors of all the stack, CI, staging environments, etc)