The economics of open source by C J Silverio | JSConf EU 2019 on HackerTube: recommended by 2 Hacker News commenters across 2 separate months, 2019–2020.
talk · intermediate · dated
C J Silverio, former npm CTO, explains how the JavaScript package commons ended up in the hands of a for-profit company with no accountability. She discusses the cost of running a registry and what the community should do next.
HN recommends it as the best account of what is wrong with npm's governance and why alternative or decentralized registries are hard.
“For those wondering what's wrong with npm, I can recommend this C J Silverio talk”
5 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.
For those wondering what's wrong with npm, I can recommend this C J Silverio talk ▶ this video Sadly, as others have noted, this Pika thing does not quite address these issues.
in “Pika – A JavaScript package registry for the modern web” · View on HN
This is a great recent talk about this problem by the former NPM CTO in which she tells her story about NPM and proposes a new decentralized package manager: ▶ this video
in “Pika CDN – A CDN for Modern JavaScript” · View on HN
> This massively depends on the architecture of the package manager though. Composer (PHPs primary package manager) only serves the metadata See also, CocoaPods. But we're really talking about two things here as if they're the same, and I think it's because the language we use for them isn't clear: package managers (like CocoaPods and Composer) and full-blown package registries (like RubyGems and NPM). I mean, the difference between them is slight; and there's overlap. They both resolve package dependencies and sort out problems, for example. But they're such very, very different things! It's not really fair to compare these two approaches and say things about Composer like "this allows them to serve the whole community with a team of 2-4 people": they're just not directly comparable. Those 2-4 people + the entire GitHub staff is what supports the whole community. Now - don't get me wrong: I think it's fine that GitHub does this! I'm not saying that CocoaPods and Composer are making the wrong choice here at all. In fact, I'm proud to work for a company that provides this service to everyone. But it hand-waves away a lot of stuff as just an "architecture" decision, when in reality it's a decision not to do the hardest part - which is hosting, because it requires gobs of money and dedicated staff and people on-call 24/7. Framing it as just a different "architecture" implies that registries like NPM are making the wrong choices by hosting their own downloads, which I think is no
in “GitHub has completed its acquisition of NPM” · View on HN
There has been. CJ Silverio gave a talk on that topic at JSConf this year: ▶ this video See also Entropic as a possible alternative to NPM: [link]
in “NPM CEO Bryan Bogensberger Resigned” · View on HN
I am trying to understand why we make NPM such a big deal (and suddenly have all these projects born to solve the NPM problem) when people have solve the issue of a package repository already. C j Silverio's point (JSConf's talk [1]) was that is NPM's scale that makes it hard. Refs: 1: ▶ this video
in “Entropic – A Federated Package Manager for JavaScript” · View on HN