Many packages attempt to be those “as seen on Tv” gadgets which fix weirdly specific issues in a functionally-fixed way. Single-function goods are frequently given cutesy branding names in hopes of making their way into your home/package.json. Now we even have the product-level copycats.
Computer code is not an appliance, and no one cares how many people play with your little gadget.
Node.js ecosystem makes things worse because of package number inflation due to a piss poor standard library (praise DENO).
But this isn't limited to Javascript. It has everything to do with Github as a social platform. Case point, the same petty drama happens in the Go community with frameworks like "Iris" and the vitriol around it. Github is a repo service yes, but also a social platform, that makes or undo careers and there is potential money involved now.
Generally, I agree, and I find package systems and social coding tools to be a net positive. Perhaps there is something like a license that can help in these situations?
I’m admittedly pretty ignorant to software licenses but I’d imagine they can help in at least this scenario.
Many packages attempt to be those “as seen on Tv” gadgets which fix weirdly specific issues in a functionally-fixed way. Single-function goods are frequently given cutesy branding names in hopes of making their way into your home/package.json. Now we even have the product-level copycats.
Computer code is not an appliance, and no one cares how many people play with your little gadget.