You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I believe the node-* naming convention is from the days where many repositories got the node- prefix to I guess be more explicit that it was a node module. Today I think people get that anyway because of an existing package.json and whatnot.
I also think that renaming this to match the module name is a good idea.
I know @juliangruber has +1'ed this before. What about the rest of you? :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I believe the node-* naming convention is from the days where many repositories got the node- prefix to I guess be more explicit that it was a node module. Today I think people get that anyway because of an existing package.json and whatnot.
I also think that renaming this to match the module name is a good idea.
I know @juliangruber has +1'ed this before. What about the rest of you? :)
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
I believe the
node-*
naming convention is from the days where many repositories got thenode-
prefix to I guess be more explicit that it was a node module. Today I think people get that anyway because of an existingpackage.json
and whatnot.I also think that renaming this to match the module name is a good idea.
I know @juliangruber has +1'ed this before. What about the rest of you? :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: