(no title)
perpetualcrayon | 7 years ago
This way anyone who decides to trust the new maintainer will be able to act as a "canary in the coal mine", notifying others if they run into issues. This also delays the gratification to the new maintainer. If they're truly malicious they'll need to spend maybe months / years maintaining the code / fixing bugs until they'll be able to hit pay dirt. I think most malicious devs will not want to pay this price.
EDIT: This would also act as a window for (a) folks to find other alternatives for their projects, and (b) inspire folks to build alternative options.
I think the willingness to fork over access to widely used packages isn't just a reflection on your desire to move on from the project, but it also reflects your blatant disregard of the thousands, maybe millions, of people who depend on what you've built.
ATsch|7 years ago
perpetualcrayon|7 years ago
"I have not looked at the readme...". Maybe this will create a market for a new type of project. The one that lets folks know the status of the packages they use in their project.
Klathmon|7 years ago
So if you wanted to stop maintaining your very own `right_pad`, you could mark it as deprecated so devs installing it get a warning in the CLI, and I could then publish my own `@klathmon/right_pad` and if you want you could endorse it in your readme if you wanted.
albedoa|7 years ago
Why do you say that? The point is that you do not transfer it.
madeofpalk|7 years ago
There's properties you can set in the package.json to indicate that a package is deprecated and/or has moved.