While I still think it's a disservice to the student, I'd be curious to hear from those that lived through this: Both those that attended and graduated and those that had to drop out.

For the former I'm guessing there's not much to report. I'd be curious about the latter.

Nevermind that actual findings like https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/02/260218031606.h... and https://scitechdaily.com/your-brain-doesnt-magically-finish-... say something completely different.

Though auto-insurance claims do show some truth to late teens and early twenties drivers being...not mentally ready.

It sounds harsh but it’s an important reality check for the student.

As a student: Grades are one of the clearest signals on whether you're a good fit for a major or topic you're interested in, you need more work, or you need to trim down the number of classes.

Not providing that clear, cumulative signal is a major disservice to the students.

Also, UofM is expensive so dragging it benefits only the financials for the school.

Once you're on your own nobody coddles you and it can be brutal.

i.e., it's not just the collective memory going away, but what will easily replace it and who will be motivated to influence.

Aren’t releases versioned, using semantic versioning?

If not, why shouldn’t a change in dependencies not trigger a new release version?

If it is versioned and if there’s a corresponding hash to the release, why wouldn’t I also expect that to change when the version and dependencies change?

I can understand that there may be historical reasons that this scheme will break how PyPI releases are built and distributed, but I also hope you understand that it violates the principle of least surprise.

The response is that there is hash pinning but only at the constituent levels. Which clearly isn’t what the OP meant.

In concept why can’t the full set of files in a release be a single, one-way hash value, with both adding or releasing changing the hash value?

That said, the savvier firms are looking to eliminate the army of low-quality, and “cheaper” contractors and consultants.

The idiotic ones are doubling-down on the cheaper labor while shoring up on spending.

It’s too early to make a conclusion but its an interesting hypothesis.

If there’s no real accountability then it’s a very real and negative problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_pack

https://microsoft.fandom.com/wiki/Windows_service_packs