3 ms·

So, fun fact: our organization name is actually Polybit Inc. -- we do business as "Standard Library" because the registry we've built is pretty much core to eve

So, fun fact: our organization name is actually Polybit Inc. -- we do business as "Standard Library" because the registry we've built is pretty much core to everything we do. I expect the easy way to get around this is for folks to refer to us, when speaking technically, as "stdlib.com" ("standard lib dot com").

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
SahAssar 7y ago
How would this work in languages where stdlib is an established way of talking about the actual built in standard library like https://devguide.python.org/stdlibchanges/ https://devguide.python.org/stdlibchanges/ vs https://github.com/stdlib/lib-python https://github.com/stdlib/lib-python ? Also you aren't worried at all about confusion or typosquatting (or what you would call it with a common name) with all the variations of standardlibrary, standardlib, stdlib? The npm package name standardlibrary was open, let me know if you want it transferred. No charge or bullshit, of course. I just claimed it because it was free and I guessed that somebody would typosquat it sooner or later considering your company name. If not I'll just release it
- keithwhor 7y ago
  We're not particularly concerned about typosquatting for now. The name is based on the `.com`, i.e. all APIs / workflows built on Standard Library go to `username.api.stdlib.com`. The packages we use in NPM, RubyGems and Python are just called `lib`. The way 99.99% of developers have used us to date is starting with our in-browser or CLI tooling which installs / requires the correct package automatically. So I think that removes some of the risk you're talking about. :) You can hold on to the NPM package for now if you'd like! That's a good one. If we do find typosquatting becomes an issue, do you mind if I reach out?