Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rovingeye 301 days ago
I made the same comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44931575

"To discourage package authors from publishing packages written in TypeScript"

I tried to use it with private packages but that doesn't work either, apparently node doesn't even read the "private" field.
2 comments
throwanem 301 days ago
"Written only in TypeScript" might put it better. If your module ships TypeScript source and a JS build as it should, then this will never affect it. Otherwise, to support stripping arbitrary modules would immediately compromise the design goal of light weight, due to the torrent of ill-founded and -formed bug reports incorrectly raised on Node that would follow. ("Don't make the maintainers' lives too miserable to continue the work" being also of course an implicit goal.)
link
rovingeye 301 days ago
Why would I want to ship a JS build for my private package? That's just extra machinery I don't need. Switching to a superior runtime would be easier.
link
throwanem 301 days ago
Well, I don't suppose I know, but if it's an argument you want then that's actually room 12a just next door.
link
rovingeye 301 days ago
I can sort of understand the publishing argument, since npm doesn't solve for this at all, unlike JSR:

"You publish TypeScript source, and JSR handles generating API docs, .d.ts files, and transpiling your code for cross-runtime compatibility."

Not allowing it for private modules doesn't make much sense to me, though. It either forces me to use a loader, or now figure out a JS build step which I have been more than happy to avoid up until now.

link
throwanem 301 days ago
The implication is that the capability is implemented to conditionally allow, which I suspect has been deliberately avoided, less because the change would require much technical effort (though it might; I don't know) than because the PR to make it offers another opportunity to keep that door nailed firmly shut.

As a past and present module author, I don't feel myself unduly burdened by the need to maintain the tooling to support the work I publish. Or present-ish, anyway; last time around it was Bower and about Node 8, and the experience these days is worlds more comfortable.

I can see why others would feel differently, but again, I'm not really here to argue preferences. If you'd like to fill your afternoon instead with an enjoyable, on-theme read, try the UNIX-HATERS Handbook: https://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf

link
reactordev 301 days ago
It’s a missed opportunity for sure
link