Yes but I wasn't referring to this case in particular. Let's say something has
been put out as open source but actually infringes on someone's copyright.
Allowing people to replace it after a takedown is unhelpful. Either way here's
hoping we end up with hundreds of thousands of packages so we c
On 03/22/2016 11:00 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
On 23 Mar 2016, at 4:39 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Well, yes, but this seems like an npm registry problem. If you're going to allow
something silly like "unpublish" after something's already out in the wild, and
then not allow republishing the same
> On 23 Mar 2016, at 4:39 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
>
> Well, yes, but this seems like an npm registry problem. If you're going to
> allow something silly like "unpublish" after something's already out in the
> wild, and then not allow republishing the same version, then that's just
> asking for
On 03/22/2016 09:48 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
A cautionary tale as we explore package dependency management:
"How one developer just broke Node, Babel and thousands of projects in
11 lines of JavaScript"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/23/npm_left_pad_chaos/
Well, yes, but this seems li
A cautionary tale as we explore package dependency management:
"How one developer just broke Node, Babel and thousands of projects in
11 lines of JavaScript"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/23/npm_left_pad_chaos/
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Systems
_
