npm does not stand for "node package manager" #34

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
@seldo

seldo commented Jun 12, 2015

It is also not capitalized :-)

I loved this article. An epic poem for the internet age.

npm does not stand for "node package manager"
It is also not capitalized :-)
@vitorgalvao

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vitorgalvao

vitorgalvao Jun 12, 2015

To be more accurate, npm isn’t “the package manager for Node.js”, but “a package manager for JavaScript”. There is nothing tying it to Node.js, and it can be (and is) used in other contexts (which they prominently show on the top of the website). Node.js uses npm by default as a package manager, but other than that they don’t have a much deeper link.

To be more accurate, npm isn’t “the package manager for Node.js”, but “a package manager for JavaScript”. There is nothing tying it to Node.js, and it can be (and is) used in other contexts (which they prominently show on the top of the website). Node.js uses npm by default as a package manager, but other than that they don’t have a much deeper link.

@tophtucker tophtucker added the text label Jun 12, 2015

@Khobalt

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Khobalt

Khobalt Jun 12, 2015

Read the first readme for npm and I think you'll agree they are quite deeply linked. Even if the projects have diverged, "node package manager" is totally accurate, if not up to date.

Khobalt commented Jun 12, 2015

Read the first readme for npm and I think you'll agree they are quite deeply linked. Even if the projects have diverged, "node package manager" is totally accurate, if not up to date.

@vitorgalvao

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vitorgalvao

vitorgalvao Jun 12, 2015

totally accurate, if not up to date.

You seem to be arguing a definition is valid today because it was valid in the past. That makes no sense.

From npm’s CLI team lead:

we draw no distinction between joyent/node and iojs/io.js. We support them both equally. npm, Inc. is not using iojs in production -- yet -- but if iojs users encounter difficulties using npm with iojs, we will treat them as seriously as issues using npm with node.

npm is the package manager Node.js uses, it is not Node.js’s package manager; it does not serve them. That wording and definition is limiting, and implies npm is useful because of and perhaps even dependent on Node.js, which is false. Even if it were true in the past, it is irrelevant now, and for the article. If at one point in time ed billed itself as the best way to edit text and it was true1, that no longer holds true today simply due to those past claims.

I’ll say it again: if the projects took different routes they are different things, and their history bears no relevance to this particular sentence. npm is, as of today, not simply Node.js’s package manager, which makes this sentence, written in the present tense, inaccurate.

Their README of the past is without a doubt less relevant and important for the present than the top of their current homepage and their current README.


1 Not saying it did or it was, merely making a point.

totally accurate, if not up to date.

You seem to be arguing a definition is valid today because it was valid in the past. That makes no sense.

From npm’s CLI team lead:

we draw no distinction between joyent/node and iojs/io.js. We support them both equally. npm, Inc. is not using iojs in production -- yet -- but if iojs users encounter difficulties using npm with iojs, we will treat them as seriously as issues using npm with node.

npm is the package manager Node.js uses, it is not Node.js’s package manager; it does not serve them. That wording and definition is limiting, and implies npm is useful because of and perhaps even dependent on Node.js, which is false. Even if it were true in the past, it is irrelevant now, and for the article. If at one point in time ed billed itself as the best way to edit text and it was true1, that no longer holds true today simply due to those past claims.

I’ll say it again: if the projects took different routes they are different things, and their history bears no relevance to this particular sentence. npm is, as of today, not simply Node.js’s package manager, which makes this sentence, written in the present tense, inaccurate.

Their README of the past is without a doubt less relevant and important for the present than the top of their current homepage and their current README.


1 Not saying it did or it was, merely making a point.

@blinsay

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@blinsay

blinsay Jun 12, 2015

It's actually not a package manager at all. NPM stands for Node Package Maid.

blinsay commented Jun 12, 2015

It's actually not a package manager at all. NPM stands for Node Package Maid.

@seldo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@seldo

seldo Jun 13, 2015

@vitorgalvao: it is both the package manager for node.js and a package manager for JavaScript (I wrote the copy for the website, but feel like "the" package manager for JavaScript is perhaps getting ahead of reality a little bit).

Either way, in this context I thought the former was more relevant :-)

seldo commented Jun 13, 2015

@vitorgalvao: it is both the package manager for node.js and a package manager for JavaScript (I wrote the copy for the website, but feel like "the" package manager for JavaScript is perhaps getting ahead of reality a little bit).

Either way, in this context I thought the former was more relevant :-)

@vitorgalvao

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vitorgalvao

vitorgalvao Jun 13, 2015

but feel like "the" package manager for JavaScript is perhaps getting ahead of reality a little bit

Which is why I called it, in the first reply, a package manager for JavaScript.

I also started by saying “to be more accurate”. I do not think your current definition is wrong, just that it should be broader and more complete by not limiting the definition to Node.js.

but feel like "the" package manager for JavaScript is perhaps getting ahead of reality a little bit

Which is why I called it, in the first reply, a package manager for JavaScript.

I also started by saying “to be more accurate”. I do not think your current definition is wrong, just that it should be broader and more complete by not limiting the definition to Node.js.

@seldo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@seldo

seldo Jun 13, 2015

In the context, the point of the sentence is not to fully define the scope of npm and its exact definition. It's to introduce npm and explain why it's relevant to the non-technical person reading the article. Somebody who is only just finding out that Node.js exists is not going to want to learn about io.js etc. etc.

seldo commented Jun 13, 2015

In the context, the point of the sentence is not to fully define the scope of npm and its exact definition. It's to introduce npm and explain why it's relevant to the non-technical person reading the article. Somebody who is only just finding out that Node.js exists is not going to want to learn about io.js etc. etc.

@vitorgalvao

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vitorgalvao

vitorgalvao Jun 13, 2015

Which both definitions do, with the exact same amount of words, with none of them being simpler to understand than the other. Given that, there is absolutely no reason to not use the more correct, broader definition. It’s not like we’re talking about explaining the whole backstory, here, both definitions are correct and simple, but one of them is more accurate.

Which both definitions do, with the exact same amount of words, with none of them being simpler to understand than the other. Given that, there is absolutely no reason to not use the more correct, broader definition. It’s not like we’re talking about explaining the whole backstory, here, both definitions are correct and simple, but one of them is more accurate.

@seldo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@seldo

seldo Jun 13, 2015

Okay. How about "as the CTO of npm, Inc., I think it's less confusing if our product was described in this context as the package manager for node.js rather than introducing its (more accurate, but not relevant) role as a package manager for javascript"?

seldo commented Jun 13, 2015

Okay. How about "as the CTO of npm, Inc., I think it's less confusing if our product was described in this context as the package manager for node.js rather than introducing its (more accurate, but not relevant) role as a package manager for javascript"?

@vitorgalvao

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vitorgalvao

vitorgalvao Jun 13, 2015

How about "as the CTO of npm, Inc.

Your position is irrelevant to the matter, and gives you no special powers.

I think

Expressing your opinion, though, is perfectly valid.

it's less confusing

It’s there we disagree. You spoke about non-technical people before. Most people I know are non-technical; some know what JavaScript is, none has any clue what Node.js is.

It is clear we won’t reach an agreement, though. We both made our points, so whoever is in charge of making the change has enough information to make an informed decision.

How about "as the CTO of npm, Inc.

Your position is irrelevant to the matter, and gives you no special powers.

I think

Expressing your opinion, though, is perfectly valid.

it's less confusing

It’s there we disagree. You spoke about non-technical people before. Most people I know are non-technical; some know what JavaScript is, none has any clue what Node.js is.

It is clear we won’t reach an agreement, though. We both made our points, so whoever is in charge of making the change has enough information to make an informed decision.

@ftrain

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

ftrain commented Jun 13, 2015

chwwwslwsaaxg4k

@vilmibm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

vilmibm commented Jun 13, 2015

lol

@ftrain

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@HugoGiraudel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@HugoGiraudel

HugoGiraudel Jun 13, 2015

This thread is getting better and better. :)

This thread is getting better and better. :)

@ftrain

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ftrain

ftrain Jun 13, 2015

One idea: We could wait until mid or late 2016 to let things settle down, then decide on the best course of action.

ftrain commented Jun 13, 2015

One idea: We could wait until mid or late 2016 to let things settle down, then decide on the best course of action.

@seldo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@seldo

seldo Jun 13, 2015

I am deeply sorry I got involved in the first place. There's your metaphor for open-source participation, Paul.

seldo commented Jun 13, 2015

I am deeply sorry I got involved in the first place. There's your metaphor for open-source participation, Paul.

@mcdonnelldean

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mcdonnelldean

mcdonnelldean Jun 13, 2015

... mumble, mumble... ECMAScript... mumble... should be epm by rights... mumble...

... mumble, mumble... ECMAScript... mumble... should be epm by rights... mumble...

@regularmike

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@regularmike

regularmike Jun 13, 2015

"Node package manager" is just one of many ridiculous and non-sensical made-up expansions of npm. What would that even mean???

"Node package manager" is just one of many ridiculous and non-sensical made-up expansions of npm. What would that even mean???

@mcdonnelldean

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mcdonnelldean

mcdonnelldean Jun 13, 2015

@disusered I'm operating on the assumption they are ribbing each other. Joking aside I think @seldo's change is correct for the target audience. While it may be used for other things, npm is first and foremost, a package manager for Node.js

@disusered I'm operating on the assumption they are ribbing each other. Joking aside I think @seldo's change is correct for the target audience. While it may be used for other things, npm is first and foremost, a package manager for Node.js

@vielmetti

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vielmetti

vielmetti Jun 13, 2015

It was simpler when we were arguing about the name of the Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister.

It was simpler when we were arguing about the name of the Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister.

@regularmike

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@regularmike

regularmike Jun 13, 2015

After we sort this out we can set everyone straight on how to pronounce "OS X."

After we sort this out we can set everyone straight on how to pronounce "OS X."

@nisaacson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

@regularmike

say "OS X"
@regularmike

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@regularmike

regularmike Jun 14, 2015

utter "OS X"

utter "OS X"

@drewlustro

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@drewlustro

drewlustro Jun 14, 2015

epic thread is epic 💯

🎱 OS X is pronounced "Auss Ex".

epic thread is epic 💯

🎱 OS X is pronounced "Auss Ex".

@farrukhsubhani

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@farrukhsubhani

farrukhsubhani Jun 15, 2015

OS X has OS silent.

OS X has OS silent.

@mootpt

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

mootpt commented Jun 15, 2015

This thread right now

@tomprince

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tomprince

tomprince Jun 16, 2015

While npm may no longer stand for "Node Package Manager", that is the origin of the name. I think removing that connection makes the text weaker.

While npm may no longer stand for "Node Package Manager", that is the origin of the name. I think removing that connection makes the text weaker.

@tophtucker tophtucker closed this in 2f88525 Jul 3, 2015

@seldo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

seldo commented Jul 3, 2015

\o/

@joshuamabina joshuamabina referenced this pull request in joshuamabina/blog Feb 20, 2018

Open

Laravel Deployment - Brain Dump #1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment