4 ms·
If by "social" you mean bad decisions on settling a naming dispute, yes it was a social issue. That issue hasn't really been addressed publicly (the official po
by pluma 10y ago
If by "social" you mean bad decisions on settling a naming dispute, yes it was a social issue. That issue hasn't really been addressed publicly (the official policy still doesn't specify how disputes are decided by npm when no amicable agreement can be reached -- other than what essentially boils down to "we'll do what we feel is right").
The actual disruption however was solved by npm Inc disabling unpublishing (except for some very specific circumstances) and by creating a dummy account unpublished modules are reassigned to to avoid abuse (whereas previously anyone could simply claim unpublished modules and publish new versions).
- nailer 10y ago> If by "social" you mean bad decisions on settling a naming dispute, yes it was a social issue. No, I mean someone retroactively removing a package others were using out of spite.