441–450 of 827 posts
Perhaps the JS community at large would be better off with a similar system? I remember sometime long ago that there was a JSAN effort: http://www.openjsan.org/
The fact that this is possible with NPM seems really dangerous. The author unpublished (erm, "liberated") over 250 NPM modules, making those global names (e.g. "map", "alert", "iframe", "subscription", etc) available for anyone to register and replace with any code they wish. Since these libs are now baked into various package.json configuration files (some with 10s of thousands of installs per month, "left-pad" with…
I'm left thinking of how Go does it, whereby repositories are downloaded via git or whatever version control software's URL. Making it impossible for the admins of "NPM" to take down a package. Add in IPFS and you've got one heck of a "package manager" I guess Go's approach is not really a "package manager" but nobody can truly stop you from downloading from a git repository, and if they do, you can go to the forks e…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless you're npm: https://twitter.com/seldo/status/712414400808755200
That's pretty interesting. I wonder if it's within npm's legal right to distribute someone else's IP in such a way that they do not desire. Granted the license is WTFPL but does that include taking over the IP itself?
The fact that this is possible with NPM seems really dangerous. The author unpublished (erm, "liberated") over 250 NPM modules, making those global names (e.g. "map", "alert", "iframe", "subscription", etc) available for anyone to register and replace with any code they wish. Since these libs are now baked into various package.json configuration files (some with 10s of thousands of installs per month, "left-pad" with…
I'm left thinking of how Go does it, whereby repositories are downloaded via git or whatever version control software's URL. Making it impossible for the admins of "NPM" to take down a package. Add in IPFS and you've got one heck of a "package manager" I guess Go's approach is not really a "package manager" but nobody can truly stop you from downloading from a git repository, and if they do, you can go to the forks e…
It's almost as if privately controlled, centralized archives are a bad idea.
The fact that this is possible with NPM seems really dangerous. The author unpublished (erm, "liberated") over 250 NPM modules, making those global names (e.g. "map", "alert", "iframe", "subscription", etc) available for anyone to register and replace with any code they wish. Since these libs are now baked into various package.json configuration files (some with 10s of thousands of installs per month, "left-pad" with…
That said the decisions by NPM are also hard to follow. Why allow someone else to take over ownership of a package? Why allow anyone to take down published versions of an open source package? If you publish open source stuff on my site I have all the right to keep that stuff in that version and share it with others. That's pretty much what FOSS is about, right?
Also: https://twitter.com/seldo/status/712414400808755200
For those defending Kik's trademark, its like MS trying to trademark the word Windows. Didn't work that well for them either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._Lindows.com....
not the unpublishing part. the part where the thing that you require to sell/publish/do your job isn't under control or isn't stored within your organization.
Am i wrong in thinking that you should just have a local copy of all of your source code dependencies. would it really take that much longer?
Can we talk about how patents own namespaces? If I have a little "kik" soccer tournament that no one knows about, then it's fine. As soon as the namespace collides with the HUGE, vastly connected internet, it's a "problem". We're going to run out of proper nouns, folks.
This has nothing to do with patent law. It's a trademark dispute. The two types of laws are as unrelated as property law and contract law.
> "NPM is someone’s private land"
No shit npm is a privately owned company? That hasn't changed before nor after you took these actions.
> "Power To The People"
This is what I don't get. All of the modules that were unpublished seem unpopular / not used so I don't know what impact this will have, but how does screwing over users of open source software equate to power to the people?