Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have to deal with many of these regularly, yes. But more generally, I'm expressing a desire for fewer ecosystem-specific package managers and more ecosystem-agnostic package managers.
Right, but why? Generalization isn't free, and there doesn't seem to be any real benefit here. This sounds to me like arguing that there should be one programming language, or one version control system, or one declarative sysadmin automation language. I think that the cost in complexity for one Uber package manager is greater than the waste in duplication from many smaller, more focused ones.
Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
81–82 of 82 posts
Re: Show HN: WAPM – Package Manager for WebAssembly
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 ar…