I hope it will evolve into a platform that prioritizes curation and fosters collaboration, rather than the chaotic free-for-all that defines npm currently. For

I hope it will evolve into a platform that prioritizes curation and fosters collaboration, rather than the chaotic free-for-all that defines npm currently. For too long, npm has diverged from its original purpose as a collaborative package manager for a programming language, transforming instead into a battleground for popularity contests. The result is a landscape littered with neglected packages. Developers frequently bypass the opportunity to contribute to existing projects in favor of launching their clones, driven by the allure of glory and name recognition. While I fully support developers receiving the recognition they deserve, this approach undermines the integrity of the package ecosystem. The ideal state, where packages thrive rather than peak and fade within a mere six months, seems increasingly unattainable. All the name squatting and harmful packages are worth a whole another discussion. I find myself nostalgic for the days of package managers that championed collective effort, building an ecosystem of functional components. Packages were often named for their functionality, leading to a landscape where one canonical package existed for each task. This approach, favoring practicality over catchy branding and endless turnover, is vastly preferable to the current state of affairs