Your entitled to your own beliefs, but Julia is more of a research project that's crowd sourcing phds to make products for them then it is a programming language. In other programming languages I've used past a 1.0 release (hint that's many) I've never seen the type of breaking bugs that occur. If Julia is this end all be all scientific computing language then I expect the CSV package not to be incompatible with Base after a minor version bump. Having to manually compile a patched fix to read csvs is not normal... Sorry, but that's never happened to me in R, python, Go, Rust, C++, Java, Scala, JavaScript, etc. If that's an unrealistic expectation then maybe Julia is just holding an incredibly low bar compared to it's competitors.

It's not about having issues. It's the type of issues and how they affect end users. There's no FUD associated with that. Just facts. Julia has been around for a decade, the FUD campaign stuff shouldn't even be a concern for the project at this point. Other languages from the same era are either gone, or are dealing with very different social deterrers to adoption.

I'm not typing these things out for FUD to slow Julia developers role or something. Actually I hope they listen and actually work to fix things that matter. I invested a lot of time and effort into the language. Currently I'm looking at it as a complete waste with mostly negative side effects to my career and where I could have invested my time. Trying to do one of two things, encourage change, get people on the fence about trying it to wait until it's actually ready.