6 ms·

What was the "other side" of leftpad? As far as I remember, the broken system wrought havoc, not the developer who chose to withdraw his modules. I don't think

What was the "other side" of leftpad? As far as I remember, the broken system wrought havoc, not the developer who chose to withdraw his modules. I don't think the developer's reasons are much relevant when discussing how reliable their word is.

dspillett 6y ago
The broken system allowed him to be a dick. OK, so the is more to it than that and he did have a genuine grievance (I forgot exactly what) bit in dealing with that he caused a pile collateral damage for innocent bystanders. (Innocent bystanders who errantly put too much faith in dependency oriented programming which brings us back to the broken system)
- alias_neo 6y ago
  It's his work, and he had every right to pull every module he hosts there in protest. If this was a walk out or some other form of protest, nobody would be calling him a dick, I think that's a little out of order. That said, the system is definitely broken. His reaction to the Kik thing is probably where he was at fault, I think it would have been reasonable for him to back down there; companies, in the US at least are obligated to protect their IP in order to retain their rights over it (as far as I have understood from various discussions on HN), but perhaps the forceful lawyering got his back up? Also I have no idea of jurisdiction of any parties involved, I just assume US.
  - orestarod 6y ago
    It's always safe to back down if you don't have the guts to go on, but you can't say it's a fault not to back down.
- ivanhoe 6y ago
  > Innocent bystanders who errantly put too much faith in dependency oriented programming and who need an external package to leftpad a string... the most fascinating part of that story to me...
- throwphoton 6y ago
  > too much faith in dependency oriented programming Which is why it's a distraction to even consider this particular person's track record. Even if this same person pulled one critical package a month for the next year, the fundamental problem is still that the ecosystem in general relies on parties with no obligations to manage critical dependencies.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

dspillett 6y ago

The broken system allowed him to be a dick. OK, so the is more to it than that and he did have a genuine grievance (I forgot exactly what) bit in dealing with that he caused a pile collateral damage for innocent bystanders. (Innocent bystanders who errantly put too much faith in dependency oriented programming which brings us back to the broken system)

alias_neo 6y ago
It's his work, and he had every right to pull every module he hosts there in protest. If this was a walk out or some other form of protest, nobody would be calling him a dick, I think that's a little out of order. That said, the system is definitely broken. His reaction to the Kik thing is probably where he was at fault, I think it would have been reasonable for him to back down there; companies, in the US at least are obligated to protect their IP in order to retain their rights over it (as far as I have understood from various discussions on HN), but perhaps the forceful lawyering got his back up? Also I have no idea of jurisdiction of any parties involved, I just assume US.
- orestarod 6y ago
  It's always safe to back down if you don't have the guts to go on, but you can't say it's a fault not to back down.
ivanhoe 6y ago
> Innocent bystanders who errantly put too much faith in dependency oriented programming and who need an external package to leftpad a string... the most fascinating part of that story to me...
throwphoton 6y ago
> too much faith in dependency oriented programming Which is why it's a distraction to even consider this particular person's track record. Even if this same person pulled one critical package a month for the next year, the fundamental problem is still that the ecosystem in general relies on parties with no obligations to manage critical dependencies.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]