Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NPM Is Joining GitHub

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 588 posts

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#361

Post by ivanbakel »

greggman3 wrote: post #344
mbesto wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NPM being such an important pillar in the software supply chain while having an unviable business model and largely being funded by VC money was never a good position to be in. Why does NPM need to be funded as a commercial entity at all? What other open source library has a private company running its package manager? This one still boggles my mind.

Confused why you think a service servings millions or billions of requests a day wouldn't require money to run. Do you think some grant magically appear out of thin air to pay for the servers, storage, bandwidth, and maintenance?

Big leap from "servers cost money" to "a package manager requires a commercial entity". How are other language ecosystems and package managers operating, many without private companies attached, when they too are serving millions of requests a day?

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#362

Post by notRobot »

timrod wrote: post #277
mbesto wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NPM being such an important pillar in the software supply chain while having an unviable business model and largely being funded by VC money was never a good position to be in. Why does NPM need to be funded as a commercial entity at all? What other open source library has a private company running its package manager? This one still boggles my mind.

For programming languages, there are several examples of commercially run package managers: - the Java/Kotlin/Scala ecosystem is based around maven central, which is run by Sonatype, Inc. - Go modules are hosted by Google. Previously, most libraries were hosted on Github - Rust's crate index is on Github - The Docker/Moby registry is run by Docker, Inc. (though that might be a stretch for "package manager" :))

Please don't use code blocks for regular text and quotes. Really hard to read on mobile and narrow viewports.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#363

Post by hobofan »

greggman3 wrote: post #344
mbesto wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NPM being such an important pillar in the software supply chain while having an unviable business model and largely being funded by VC money was never a good position to be in. Why does NPM need to be funded as a commercial entity at all? What other open source library has a private company running its package manager? This one still boggles my mind.

Confused why you think a service servings millions or billions of requests a day wouldn't require money to run. Do you think some grant magically appear out of thin air to pay for the servers, storage, bandwidth, and maintenance?

Almost any other package repository is funded by donations from companies using them or a grant from an infrastructure provider.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#364

Post by charrondev »

sneak wrote: post #180
allover wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbf Microsoft have won back a lot of good faith with developers due to projects like VS Code and TypeScript, even for those of us who remember their past. And we're yet to hear of any negative impact of their Github acquisition (afaik - correct me if wrong).

VS Code is also spyware; I am not sure that this argument furthers your intended point. The fact that it is open source and popular is not sufficient on its own. It had to be forked (vscodium) to show basic respect for the user’s privacy and system resources.

No fork is required. If you build before from the source in its main repo, there is no tracking included by default.

It’s builds released by Microsoft that have all of their specific stuff added in.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#365

Post by chrisoverzero »

sneak wrote: post #180
allover wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbf Microsoft have won back a lot of good faith with developers due to projects like VS Code and TypeScript, even for those of us who remember their past. And we're yet to hear of any negative impact of their Github acquisition (afaik - correct me if wrong).

VS Code is also spyware; I am not sure that this argument furthers your intended point. The fact that it is open source and popular is not sufficient on its own. It had to be forked (vscodium) to show basic respect for the user’s privacy and system resources.

VSCodium say they’re not a fork.

> This is not a fork. This is a repository of scripts to automatically build Microsoft's `vscode` repository into freely-licensed binaries with a community-driven default configuration.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#366

Post by ledgerdev »

flanbiscuit wrote: post #150

I wonder if more people will look into adopting Deno[1], the new node alternative by one of the creators of Node. It does not use NPM, you pull in packages Go-style (via URLs[2]). It's supposed to be more secure because you have to explicitly give it access to anything (i.e. network, file system, etc). [1] https://deno.land/ [2] example import in Deno: import { serve } from "https://deno.land/std@v0.36.0/http/server.…

Node+NPM isn't going anywhere, but Deno sure seems like the server based runtime of the future.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#367

Post by ajay_sibri04 »

sneak wrote: post #125
K0nserv wrote: post #14

This seems like a good outcome overall. NPM being such an important pillar in the software supply chain while having an unviable business model and largely being funded by VC money was never a good position to be in. There are problems with more of the software ecosystem consolidating with a single entity but it still feels like an improvement.

I do not consider the largest distributor of proprietary, closed-source spyware (Windows) owning the fastest growing open source package manager to be a good outcome, personally.

Much better than google owning it

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#368

Post by nickpresta »

sgtfrankieboy wrote: post #228
dlivingston wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to explain? Safari has one of the highest standards compliance of any modern browser [0], which IE famously did not. It has been argued with various success [1] that Chrome is the new I.E., due to "Chrome exclusive" web standards. [0]: https://html5test.com/compare/browser/safari-11.2/chrome-30/... [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16070595

If you are going to compare browsers make sure you aren't comparing against a version of Chrome from 2013. Here is the correct comparison: https://html5test.com/compare/browser/safari-11.2/chrome-68/... Which clearly shows its the worst of the bunch. Edit: Also just noticed, the latest Chrome version that the site has is 68. We're currently on 80+

A more up-to-date, although not complete, comparison is available here: https://caniuse.com/#compare=firefox+74,chrome+80,safari+13

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#369

Post by allover »

mbesto wrote: post #256
allover wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbf Microsoft have won back a lot of good faith with developers due to projects like VS Code and TypeScript, even for those of us who remember their past. And we're yet to hear of any negative impact of their Github acquisition (afaik - correct me if wrong).

> Tbf Microsoft have won back a lot of good faith with developers due to projects like VS Code and TypeScript, even for those of us who remember their past. Those are great until they're not. It's why it's called "bait and switch". > And we're yet to hear of any negative impact of their Github acquisition (afaik - correct me if wrong). ANY ?! Heh, do a quick search just on HN and you'll find it pretty quickly.

I know what 'bait and switch' means, just like I also know what FUD means.

Next you'll call them Micro$oft. Come on now.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#370

Post by smichel17 »

wutwutwutwut wrote: post #258
mundo wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, why is this not titled "Microsoft acquires npm"?

Would be super strange if titles always referred to the top-most parent company. Every time Google does something the title should be referring to Alphabet? Please no.

The other way around, and in fact it already is that way -- we often say stuff like "Waymo, Google's self-driving car project", because we know who really runs the alphabet show.
Post reply on HN