The lack of a solver is predicated on the minimal version decision as well as insisting that breaking changes are reflected in dependency identifiers. These dec

The lack of a solver is predicated on the minimal version decision as well as insisting that breaking changes are reflected in dependency identifiers. These decisions are points on their respective spectrums that other package managers have considered and rejected, because they impose (optimistically) novel or (pessimisticly) burdensome requirements on package authors and consumers. Namely, that we bias toward stable (unchanging) builds, even when security or bugfix releases may be safely applied; and that we force authors toward uncommon and arguably awkward naming decisions when making breaking changes, essentially shifting work from computers to humans. Again, these things aren’t novel; in isolation, they’ve been considered (and rejected) by other package managers. Maybe they compose to something greater than the sum of their parts. At the moment, it’s unclear, and it mostly looks messy.