3 ms·

I think you're missing the point. These packages are stupid and too small, but they get millions of downloads a month. That's the problem with the JS community.

I think you're missing the point. These packages are stupid and too small, but they get millions of downloads a month. That's the problem with the JS community. Instead of rejecting a dependency for being silly, JS devs will happily import them to save two lines of code.

lucideer 5y ago
No. The JS community won't happily import stupid packages to save two lines of code, any more than devs in any other community. A very small minority of devs will do this, and publish their larger packages. Those millions of downloads a month are transitive.
- infamouscow 5y ago
  This is the same kind of defense C programmers make regarding their beloved footguns. That might be true in aggregate, but the exceptions are exceptionally bad, impact a lot of people, and then fools try to rationalize the footgun on HN.
  - paulhodge 5y ago
    The question is, are we seeing that bad behavior because there is something inherent about the platform that encourages it, or are we seeing more with Node just because that community is enormous. Because people love to bring up is-even as a reason why Node & NPM suck. What exactly did NPM do to create the is-even situation? (other than making it super easy to publish). What should they do differently?
    - infamouscow 5y ago
      I'm old enough to remember the early days of Node and listening to a podcast (the name escapes me) with Isaac Schlueter explaining how node_modules isn't a hidden directory because you should vendor it. The problem is Node and NPM grew at a greater rate than the rate it took to introduce someone to vendoring node_modules. Fast-forward a decade and it seems like people have forgotten all about vendoring and instead optimized for blindly shipping code warrantied for no purpose from the Internet. The excuses why people don't vendor their packages are almost identical to the excuses people don't write tests for their code (i.e., time and velocity impact). This isn't a technical problem, but a social one.

lucideer 5y ago

No. The JS community won't happily import stupid packages to save two lines of code, any more than devs in any other community. A very small minority of devs will do this, and publish their larger packages. Those millions of downloads a month are transitive.

infamouscow 5y ago
This is the same kind of defense C programmers make regarding their beloved footguns. That might be true in aggregate, but the exceptions are exceptionally bad, impact a lot of people, and then fools try to rationalize the footgun on HN.
- paulhodge 5y ago
  The question is, are we seeing that bad behavior because there is something inherent about the platform that encourages it, or are we seeing more with Node just because that community is enormous. Because people love to bring up is-even as a reason why Node & NPM suck. What exactly did NPM do to create the is-even situation? (other than making it super easy to publish). What should they do differently?
  - infamouscow 5y ago
    I'm old enough to remember the early days of Node and listening to a podcast (the name escapes me) with Isaac Schlueter explaining how node_modules isn't a hidden directory because you should vendor it. The problem is Node and NPM grew at a greater rate than the rate it took to introduce someone to vendoring node_modules. Fast-forward a decade and it seems like people have forgotten all about vendoring and instead optimized for blindly shipping code warrantied for no purpose from the Internet. The excuses why people don't vendor their packages are almost identical to the excuses people don't write tests for their code (i.e., time and velocity impact). This isn't a technical problem, but a social one.