197 points jakeasmith 1 day ago 50 comments
jakeasmith 1 day ago | parent
HackerThemAll 4 hours ago | parent
https://www.npmjs.com/package/is-odd
https://www.npmjs.com/package/is-even
https://www.npmjs.com/package/left-pad
JaggerJo 4 hours ago | parent
yurishimo 4 hours ago | parent
Years ago when npm was just getting started there was a lot of experimentation and land grabbing for packages. A few “prolific” developers were pushing these tiny utilities and then using them in their own projects which ended up being required as deps in other projects and then snowballed into is-odd being included in webpack at some point (I think I have that timeline roughly correct).
It’s still a crappy problem for sure but it’s not fair to paint most JS devs with a brush so broad.
junon 4 hours ago | parent
So of course they don't make sense now. But they were created for a reason. Before even Markov chains were a fad - let alone LLMs - we were trying to be as efficient as possible and maximize code reuse I stead of writing the same helper functions over and over again. That's what you're seeing.
b112 3 hours ago | parent
The hubris of humanity... what you're describing is akin to the US Constitution and the Founding Father's goals, ending in Donald Trump.
Node is the same horror.
Nice ideas, great premise, and all turned to garbage in the end.
junon 3 hours ago | parent
toyg 3 hours ago | parent
austin-cheney 29 minutes ago | parent
Look at any full stack job post. It’s a mess of tech stack nonsense on the backend for people who are terrified of JavaScript and a layering of framework madness on the frontend for people who are still terrified of JavaScript. So it should be no surprise to see packages like those in common use when people aren’t really writing, or even reading, the real code anyways.
That is just the coding aspect of it. There are many additional challenges to working with a bunch of cowards whose primary job is to pretend to be something they clearly aren’t.
domh 1 hour ago | parent
I don't believe any programmer is actually using these. isarray and left-pad are at least functions that didn't used to be in the standard library, to slightly excuse them.
sumtechguy 17 minutes ago | parent
domh 14 minutes ago | parent
whywhywhywhy 2 minutes ago | parent
vachina 42 minutes ago | parent
layer8 3 hours ago | parent
dolmen 3 hours ago | parent
> So I had a decision to make. I could dive back into PHP after almost a decade away, hand the package to one of the people who’d offered, or let it keep sitting there.
We are in the AI era. As a maintainer of an open source project that I haven't touched for years, I would first start by asking an AI to produce a fix for the issue and check what it proposes. This definitely reduces the mental load and risk of breaking an old codebase that so many users depend on.
Deprecating the project is playing the open source game in an other dimension: tell the word that depending on this project was a bad idea in the first place and that everyone should move on. But releasing a fix on a deprecated project is fine too.
So both actions are on different dimensions, this isn't a choice between 2 options.
jjice 2 hours ago | parent
mech422 2 hours ago | parent
lukeify 2 hours ago | parent
iso1631 2 hours ago | parent
dspillett 1 hour ago | parent
dspillett 2 hours ago | parent
Would you prefer it just sat there unfixed and unsupported?
post-it 2 hours ago | parent
serial_dev 2 hours ago | parent
And yes, if your timeline as a dependency enjoyer is "is this project going to be maintained for 15 years" and you still assumed the answer is yes, it's kind of on you adding a dependency.
dspillett 2 hours ago | parent
Fixing the issue could set an expectation in current users of the package that it might get updates going forward, which it obviously won't from this maintainer, potentially reducing any impetus that might exist to move over to something that is a more correct solution these days. Handing over control of the project where it is has risks which are stated in TFA.
So while both fixing and deprecating could have been done, I think the right choice (just mark it as deprecated) has been made. Not fixing the existing bug(s) will not break anything that is using the package any more than it is already broken. If one of the existing issues had potential to be a security issue then I might err more towards fix+deprecate (with big red text included in any announcement of the fix to the effect that this is the last one and future issues won't get resolved upstream).
nkrisc 1 hour ago | parent
Sander_Marechal 6 hours ago | parent
laruss5 6 hours ago | parent
TimWolla 6 hours ago | parent
> This package is abandoned and no longer maintained. No replacement package was suggested.
Both adding it as a dependency using composer and installing it from a lockfile results in:
$ composer require jakeasmith/http_build_url
[…]
Package jakeasmith/http_build_url is abandoned, you should avoid using it. No replacement was suggested.
[…]
$ rm -r vendor/
$ composer install
[…]
- Installing jakeasmith/http_build_url (1.0.2): Extracting archive
Package jakeasmith/http_build_url is abandoned, you should avoid using it. No replacement was suggested.
[…]
[1] https://packagist.org/packages/jakeasmith/http_build_urlTimwi 2 hours ago | parent
crumb1e 4 hours ago | parent
AltruisticGapHN 4 hours ago | parent
I rarely see people use that feature yet tons of repos on Github are essentially dead.
jamietanna 3 hours ago | parent
samayashar 3 hours ago | parent
This article will be very useful for people who might shift back to older PHP versions for compatibility and face it.
algoth1 3 hours ago | parent
gitowiec 1 hour ago | parent
alt227 1 hour ago | parent
shevy-java 46 minutes ago | parent
hk__2 35 minutes ago | parent