The problem that eric-tucker raised, a very valid one, is that the corruption of file metadata in the published release posed a serious stability risk for anyon

The problem that eric-tucker raised, a very valid one, is that the corruption of file metadata in the published release posed a serious stability risk for anyone whose environment depends on uglify-js. At the very least, from the comments still present (i.e. not deleted) on the issue, it seems absurd to me that the maintainers closed the issue without either (1) publishing a workaround or (2) resolving the issue in production. Similarly, though, I find it reprehensible that it took so long for someone to step forward and help trace the issue - or even make an offer to do so. On a broader note: by now, I think it is a true and established fact that there is no such thing as bug-free software. Bugs exist everywhere, and there is plenty of code out there to defend against the existence of such bugs. It is absolutely and undeniably negligent to say that you won't fix a demonstrable issue in a software release because it triggers known issues in other software, especially when a non-harmful remedy is at hand.