Like of course mutable vs. immutable packaging is an issue, but it's minor. People are going to auto-accept minor-version updates to a dep anyway. The issue is people worry about growth in the set of providers of those updates, inability to know "who all the authors are".
-
-
Expecting everyone to contribute to one monolithic culture has its own problems. Would building a software ecosystem for Arabic speakers be easier if it didn't need to fit in Latin-centric infrastructure?
-
I think this is key to argument: _small_ deps are the concern, and the putative "harm done" by rewriting a dep (because you don't trust it or simply don't _like_ it -- deps are always a bit of an imperfect fit) is proportional to the dep's size. Big deps matter, but are accepted.
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
ok, that's an excellent point. so clearly, there is a need for collaboration and to study prior art, and that definitely increases the cost of making a new text-handling system from scratch. but that doesn't mean any coder should be dissuaded from getting into it.
-
(It *does* mean that they should be dissuaded from *shipping* such a thing if it doesn't adequately serve users of different cultures.)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.