Why stdx is not on crates.io
kerkour.com
Why stdx is not on crates.io
1–10 of 71 posts
Re: Why stdx is not on crates.io
#2It feels like this is worse than a package manager? As in why would I trust a random git repo to keep things up to date over the officially published channel?
Re: Why stdx is not on crates.io
#3I appreciate prople's efforts but they are misplaced. If I were passionate about this-- i'd do two things
1) A crates.io alternative which allows namespaces in package names like GitHub or alternatively. Single universal namespace doesn't seem fine (I don't think there would be necessarily changes required on the cargo side if users are willing to use full urls)
2) some kind of trust system so a user can up/down vote a package
3) Take a small one time payment for verifying a package? I don't know how this would work.
Re: Why stdx is not on crates.io
#4It just looks like stdx has copied stuff from crates and put it in a git repo. It feels like this is worse than a package manager? As in why would I trust a random git repo to keep things up to date over the officially published channel?
So as I understand it, they're not suggesting that we pile many packages into 1 git repo as a sort of pseudo-crates.io, they're just promoting the fact that you can install a package directly from a git URL, rather than using a crate name on a registry.
What seems weird about that model to me is that dependancies will not sync between these individual packages. If package A chooses the canonical git URL for package C, and package B uses a self-hosted version of package C instead, you have two versions of package C.
Re: Why stdx is not on crates.io
#5But I always thought NPM was what the author describes - just a random set of packages with git sources, which I thought was the main issue (leftpad etc.). Isn't that the case?
What about one system that just works and is there for "ages": maven repository?
Re: Why stdx is not on crates.io
#6It just looks like stdx has copied stuff from crates and put it in a git repo. It feels like this is worse than a package manager? As in why would I trust a random git repo to keep things up to date over the officially published channel?
Re: Why stdx is not on crates.io
#7It just looks like stdx has copied stuff from crates and put it in a git repo. It feels like this is worse than a package manager? As in why would I trust a random git repo to keep things up to date over the officially published channel?
And the chances of a rogue actor or id theft reduce drastically.
Re: Why stdx is not on crates.io
#8I'm a bit new to rust or npm system. But I always thought NPM was what the author describes - just a random set of packages with git sources, which I thought was the main issue (leftpad etc.). Isn't that the case? What about one system that just works and is there for "ages": maven repository?
Then, when someone throws a fit, they upload a broken version to NPM, and everyone downstream is SOL (or the package is given over to a malicious maintainer, or the maintainer is hacked, etc).
Heck, NPM doesn't (didn't?) require a license either. One of my former employers never let us use Webpack 1.x because it depended on something that depended on something that depended on a package from the very early days of NPM that didn't come with a license (it was by isaacs iirc, so it was meant to be public, but the version specified wasn't licensed). It wasn't until webpack 2.x that the versions were updated enough that all of the dependencies were formally open source.
Re: Why stdx is not on crates.io
#9Oh is that true? They tied themselves to Microsoft it seems. What about people who won't or can't use GitHub.