Is it possible to integrate wapm with web browser as plugin, so web site will be able to request up-to date wasm packages from local store instead of downloading of their own copies?
Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
61–70 of 82 posts
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#62Why a new package manager? Why not port an existing well-designed generic package manager such as Nix? Making a new package manager is very expensive in terms of developer times - developers have to learn yet another new thing to use your platform. Can you justify this? Edit: For example, as matthewbauer commented below, Nix can support WebAssembly as a compilation target: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/56555
Which general purpose package manager works correctly on Windows (not WSL, actual Windows) and Linux? Cross-platform is more important than not creating another package manager. I think a far more interesting question is, does the package repository support falling back to e.g. curl. That would allow those who don't want another package manager to still use the registry.
And you left plenty of other OSes out of that list.
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
WASM should use something like GO where you can use any git/mercurial/bazaar repository to fetch the packages and 3rd party services(i.e godoc.org) to index them.
Not a good idea. Semver range on dependency plus lock file is the holy grail of dependency management (ask Maven people) and cannot be done with git (cvs) registries. You’re tied to pinned versions (lockfile) only.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. WASM is barely off the ground and already we have a company trying to establish itself as the authoritative package manager and registry host the way NPM has become for javascript.
It's more important to prevent centralization by demanding that there be no authority other than the end user, and by building tools to enforce those expectations, than to have a "holy grail" of dependency management be controlled by a single corporate interest.
I'd rather WAPM be built with their registry as a default option, but designed to be completely agnostic regarding registries or repositories. I'd like to use it and never have to touch their servers if I don't want to.
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#64Why a new package manager? Why not port an existing well-designed generic package manager such as Nix? Making a new package manager is very expensive in terms of developer times - developers have to learn yet another new thing to use your platform. Can you justify this? Edit: For example, as matthewbauer commented below, Nix can support WebAssembly as a compilation target: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/56555
Because I don't want to deal with packages for Linux (deb, apt, rpm, tarballs, whatever), HP-UX depot, Solaris package, AIX packages, IBM i catalogs, IBM z packages, ClearPath packages, Windows (exe installers, msi, msix, appx), iOS ppa, Android (apk, aapk), and thousands of embedded OSes out there packages.
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a good idea. Semver range on dependency plus lock file is the holy grail of dependency management (ask Maven people) and cannot be done with git (cvs) registries. You’re tied to pinned versions (lockfile) only.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. WASM is barely off the ground and already we have a company trying to establish itself as the authoritative package manager and registry host the way NPM has become for javascript. It's more important to prevent centralization by demanding that there be no authority other than the end user, and by building tools to enforce those expectations, than to have a "holy grail"…
> Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good
We’re not talking about good vs perfect. We’re talking about «a big ball of hairy non-compatible dependencies» vs «an upgradeable declarative definition of dependencies».
> I'd rather WAPM be built with their registry as a default option, but designed to be completely agnostic regarding registries or repositories.
That’s how npm works, yet you don‘t see git/vcs dependencies very often. That’s because they don’t work.
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#66And so it begins. The building of "tools for tools". The inability of people to work with the fundamentals. A device in search of a problem.
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#67How do I use that?
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#68You guys are missing the forest for the trees. This is truly revolutionary.
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are you going to make money? How are you going to fund offices in CA + developers + the operating costs of the registry? I really don’t think a private entity should be running a registry. Ruby is just about the only example of a registry handled correctly - via the community and non-profits.
Ruby is an example of it done so wrongly that other languages are chopping their hands off to avoid making the same mistakes. Apparently there is a namespacing in the Ruby repository and Github started automatically pushing every fork to the repo as a gem. So fnord123/cool-project would also have intertextuality/cool-project just because you forked it. And it was a nightmare to figure out which one was the right one.…
Sigh. There is a difference between architectural design (namespacing), and funding income.
I am -not- discussing the software architecture of rubygems here, please don't start a bikeshed with that. Rubygems is a shining example of how non-profits and the ruby community fund rubygems, not yet-another-californian-company-without-clear-income-plans.
Also, there's no need for highly embellished language ("languages are chopping their hands off").
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#70You guys are missing the forest for the trees. This is truly revolutionary. https://dev.to/jwulf/i-can-t-believe-it-s-webassembly-308c
Then submit that to HN, showcasing what wapm can really do.
Instead, people here are rightly cynical. I do not want another private company managing something as fundamental as a package registry.
I want them to answer my question about how they are actually going to fund themselves. Especially with the dubious decision to pay for office space in San Francisco.