4 ms·

> WTF is wrong with JS developers Don't confuse "one idiot who wants to support Node 0.4 in 2026" with "JS developers". Everybody hates this guy and he puts hi

by halapro 7mo ago

> WTF is wrong with JS developers Don't confuse "one idiot who wants to support Node 0.4 in 2026" with "JS developers". Everybody hates this guy and he puts his hands into the most popular packages, introducing his junk dependencies everywhere.

Maxion 7mo ago
The other problem is that this is a bit of a circular path, with deps being so crap and numerous, upgrading existing old projects become a pain. There are A LOT of old projects out there that haven't been updated simply because the burden to do so is so high.
userbinator 7mo ago
Then I wish there were more of these "idiots who want to support Node 0.4 in 2026". Maybe they're the ones with the common sense to value stability and backwards compatibility over constantly trendchasing the new and shiny and wanting to break what was previously working in the misguided name of "progress".
- Griffinsauce 7mo ago
  You wouldn't if you look more deeply at this. He doesn't push for simplicity but for horrible complexity with an enormous stack of polyfills, ignoring language features that would greatly reduce all that bloat. .
  - userbinator 7mo ago
    That's also a problem. I've written JS that would work on any browser from the latest ones all the way back to IE5, and I'm not even a professional JS developer. It's not hard. Maybe "professional" is the problem: they're incentivised to make work for themselves so they deliberately add this fragility and complexity, and ignore the fact that there's no need to change.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
- josephg 7mo ago
  NodeJS has a clear support schedule for releases. Once a version of nodejs is EOL, the node team stops backporting security fixes. And you should really stop using it. Here's the calendar: https://nodejs.org/en/about/previous-releases https://nodejs.org/en/about/previous-releases Here's a list of known security vulnerabilities affecting old versions of nodejs: https://nodejs.org/en/about/eol https://nodejs.org/en/about/eol In my opinion, npm packages should only support maintained versions of nodejs. If you want to run an ancient, unsupported version of nodejs with security vulnerabilities, you're on your own.
  - userbinator 7mo ago
    "support" and "works" are two different things.
saghm 7mo ago
If everyone hates him and thinks his dependencies are junk, why would anyone let him introduce them to popular packages? Clearly there are at least some people who are indifferent enough if the dependencies are getting added elsewhere
- halapro 7mo ago
  OSS is not a democracy. If he controls packages with millions of downloads, you either follow what he does or fork the packages, which is what the article is about. And even then the vast majority of people will continue to use his packages because they don't care or don't have time to investigate bloat.
  - saghm 7mo ago
    > OSS is not a democracy. If he controls packages with millions of downloads, you either follow what he does or fork the packages, which is what the article is about. My point is that in order for any other package not controlled by him, there needs to be someone choosing to depend on them (either by adding it themselves or merging a change that adds it). Whoever that is clearly doesn't seem to hate it as much as you claimed. > And even then the vast majority of people will continue to use his packages because they don't care or don't have time to investigate bloat. So in other words, you were grossly exaggerating when you said "everyone" hates the junk dependencies. By your own words, the vast majority of people don't seem to really care enough about it to do anything.
albedoa 7mo ago
[flagged]

by halapro 7mo ago

Maxion 7mo ago

The other problem is that this is a bit of a circular path, with deps being so crap and numerous, upgrading existing old projects become a pain. There are A LOT of old projects out there that haven't been updated simply because the burden to do so is so high.

userbinator 7mo ago

Then I wish there were more of these "idiots who want to support Node 0.4 in 2026". Maybe they're the ones with the common sense to value stability and backwards compatibility over constantly trendchasing the new and shiny and wanting to break what was previously working in the misguided name of "progress".

Griffinsauce 7mo ago
You wouldn't if you look more deeply at this. He doesn't push for simplicity but for horrible complexity with an enormous stack of polyfills, ignoring language features that would greatly reduce all that bloat. .
- userbinator 7mo ago
  That's also a problem. I've written JS that would work on any browser from the latest ones all the way back to IE5, and I'm not even a professional JS developer. It's not hard. Maybe "professional" is the problem: they're incentivised to make work for themselves so they deliberately add this fragility and complexity, and ignore the fact that there's no need to change.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
josephg 7mo ago
NodeJS has a clear support schedule for releases. Once a version of nodejs is EOL, the node team stops backporting security fixes. And you should really stop using it. Here's the calendar: https://nodejs.org/en/about/previous-releases https://nodejs.org/en/about/previous-releases Here's a list of known security vulnerabilities affecting old versions of nodejs: https://nodejs.org/en/about/eol https://nodejs.org/en/about/eol In my opinion, npm packages should only support maintained versions of nodejs. If you want to run an ancient, unsupported version of nodejs with security vulnerabilities, you're on your own.
- userbinator 7mo ago
  "support" and "works" are two different things.

saghm 7mo ago

If everyone hates him and thinks his dependencies are junk, why would anyone let him introduce them to popular packages? Clearly there are at least some people who are indifferent enough if the dependencies are getting added elsewhere

halapro 7mo ago
OSS is not a democracy. If he controls packages with millions of downloads, you either follow what he does or fork the packages, which is what the article is about. And even then the vast majority of people will continue to use his packages because they don't care or don't have time to investigate bloat.
- saghm 7mo ago
  > OSS is not a democracy. If he controls packages with millions of downloads, you either follow what he does or fork the packages, which is what the article is about. My point is that in order for any other package not controlled by him, there needs to be someone choosing to depend on them (either by adding it themselves or merging a change that adds it). Whoever that is clearly doesn't seem to hate it as much as you claimed. > And even then the vast majority of people will continue to use his packages because they don't care or don't have time to investigate bloat. So in other words, you were grossly exaggerating when you said "everyone" hates the junk dependencies. By your own words, the vast majority of people don't seem to really care enough about it to do anything.

albedoa 7mo ago

[flagged]