4 ms·

I'm sure companies would pay for it. The service needs to be part of the main package service, not some third party.

• raesene6 9y ago
  Interesting if you think that npm/Rubygems/PyPI are leaving a load of money on the table, why do you think they haven't introduced those services so far...
  • cdnsteve 9y ago
    Because their mission isn't to generate income like a traditional business. But if the income went back to the foundations, like Python Foundation, I think that would make sense.
    • raesene6 9y ago
      npm is a commercial organisation, they offer paid subscriptions but don't offer a curated package signed option...
      • cdnsteve 9y ago
        Sort of a critical feature they are missing
    • wongarsu 9y ago
      But income can be also used to help finance their main mission. Obviously they seem to operate fine without strong reasons to expand revenue streams, but I feel like they ignore an opportunity to create improvements for just about everyone.
    • xapata 9y ago
      Anaconda gives a healthy amount to open source, either by donations to foundations like NumFOCUS or paying salaries of contributors. Is that what you're looking for?
  • jessaustin 9y ago
    ISTM we're just talking about running an alternate, more restrictive registry? npm etc. don't have to play any part in that. This service could be offered by anyone: IBM could do it.
    • raesene9 9y ago
      Indeed IBM or anyone else could do this, but they're not, which implies a lack of demand.