Not to beat a dead horse but I see this again and again with dependencies. Each time I get more worried that the same will happen with rust. I understand the fat std library approach won’t work but I really still want a good solution where I can trust packages to be safe and high quality.

If the fat std library is not viable you can only increase security requirements.

Axios has like 100M downloads per week. A couple of people with MFA should have to approve changes before it gets published.

Hosting curated dependencies is a commercially valuable service. Eventually an economy arises where people pay vendors to vet packages.

Why wouldn't the "fat std" thing work? Yes it's hard to design properly, both in scope and actual design (especially for an unstandardized language still moving fast), but throwing the towel and punting the problem to the "free market" of uncurated public repos is even worse.

It's what we call in France "la fête du slip".

PS: that's one reason I try to use git submodules in my Common Lisp projects instead of QuickLisp, because I really see the size of my deptree this way.

NPM should have a curation mechanism, via staff review or crowdsourcing, where versions of popular packages are promoted to a stable set, like linux distros do. I would only use curated versions if they had such a thing.

An alternative:

- copy the dependencies' tests into your own tests

- copy the code in to your codebase as a library using the same review process you would for code from your own team

- treat updates to the library in the same way you would for updates to your own code

Apparently, this extra work will now not be a problem, because we have AI making us 10x more efficient. To be honest, even without AI, we should've been doing this from the start, even if I understand why we haven't. The excuses are starting to wear thin though.