Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Octoth0rpe 1864 days ago
> regarding 1000+ deps, yes that's a bad thing but it's not really about language, it's rather about people.

Not sure that I agree that it's about 'people', except in the sense that every problem with languages/their ecosystems are a people problem because people created them; but I 100% agree that it's not about the language.

My take on the situation is that we have 2 separate issues:

1) Auditing, which is basically an economics issue. It'd help a lot if someone with pockets full o' money were willing to fund a couple mil of auditing infrastructure for npmjs. 2) Devs pulling in lots of packages (which pull in packages, all the way down), which _may_ be partially mitigated by a better base language (no more leftpad, etc). Personally I'm skeptical of the better runtime/language solution.

I think one thing that might help is if there was some automatic way of marking packages as 'safe' in the sense of no side effects, no writing to files, no network activity guaranteed. Such packages could be installed with confidence, and have a lower priority for auditing.

Another possible solution would be a cultural shift among developers to prioritize reducing dependencies with every release. I'd love to see that in a release notes, how many packages were added/removed!