|
|
|
|
|
|
by qwerty3344
1373 days ago
|
|
|
In the simulation you can see very common helper deps do receive quite a disproportionate amount of funding relative to the effort to maintain though. For example, `rimraf` (~400 LOC), `del` (~100 LOC), `cross-env` (this one is archived) all receive a ton of funding, whereas major projects like `electron` get a small amount since it's not used as often even though it would be much more impactful if it were to fall into disrepair. |
|
|
We are thinking through how to give subscriptions control over projects and organizations to exclude, so you could choose to exclude tiny dependencies in your subscription.
That said, defaults matter, and so it's still worth considering the implications of small projects getting a large amount of funding:
1. Subscriptions/open source repositories might be ok with a rimraf getting a lot of money, especially if it funds those developers to build other things that are high impact.
2. It might also inspire other open source projects to potentially compete for those funds in terms of offering something more or encouraging tooling that incorporates that functionality, thus creating a smaller set of dependencies.
Re: Electron getting much less than these smaller projects in the simulation. Electron getting less money is a function of the NPM packages we discovered and sampled. That could or could not be a representative set. You could argue that Electron shows up more in non-public repositories. It doesn't mean that Electron would get more money than rimraf, but the gap could be significantly less.