{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library/issues/12","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library/issues/12/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library/issues/12/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library/issues/12/events","html_url":"https://github.com/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library/issues/12","id":390881490,"node_id":"MDU6SXNzdWUzOTA4ODE0OTA=","number":12,"title":"Module specifier: npm-style \"@prefix/module\" or something else?","user":{"login":"zkat","id":17535,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjE3NTM1","avatar_url":"https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/17535?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat","html_url":"https://github.com/zkat","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/zkat/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":51,"created_at":"2018-12-13T22:11:04Z","updated_at":"2018-12-23T12:55:15Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"NONE","body":"Myself and several others at npm (a voting member) feel that we should be using the existing cowpath for scoped module syntax (`@std/foo`) instead of `std:foo` or other such alternatives.\r\n\r\nWhile this would usually come down to a simple matter of taste, in this case, we have 254,091 scoped packages in the registry already using this syntax. That's more than most other package registries for other languages, as-is, and is a significant % of our ~950k packages on the main npm registry.\r\n\r\nThis syntax would also be beneficial because it allows an _existing_ mechanism for polyfills that will work with all current and past versions of node, and can easily be made to work with the browser module system through this proposal and others specifying what non-`./` specifiers are supposed to do to resolve."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library/issues/comments/449634651","html_url":"https://github.com/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library/issues/12#issuecomment-449634651","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-javascript-standard-library/issues/12","id":449634651,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0OTYzNDY1MQ==","user":{"login":"glen-84","id":261509,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjI2MTUwOQ==","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/261509?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84","html_url":"https://github.com/glen-84","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/glen-84/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-12-23T12:55:15Z","updated_at":"2018-12-23T12:55:15Z","author_association":"NONE","body":"@isaacs,\r\n\r\nFor new developers, after installing a package from npm:\r\n\r\n```\r\nnpm i @some/thing\r\n```\r\n\r\nIsn't it reasonable to expect that they would also expect to install `@std/thing` with npm?\r\n\r\nWhat makes it different, *other* than documentation?\r\n\r\nWhat would happen?\r\n\r\n* All package managers are updated to reject installations from a list of scopes (`@std`, `@nodejs`, `@...`?)\r\n* It attempts to install a polyfill, even if you don't want/need one\r\n\r\nBuilt-in modules are not the same as user-land packages:\r\n\r\n* They're local\r\n* They're not packages (no package.json, etc.)\r\n* They're versioned differently, or not at all\r\n* They may not even be written in JavaScript (?)\r\n* etc.\r\n\r\nHaving them coexist within the same namespace is just looking for trouble. There have *already* been issues trying to reclaim names in npm. I've read people suggesting that npm just \"forcefully\" take currently-used names when they think it makes sense. That's outrageous.\r\n\r\nAnd which of these is correct? (answer quickly)\r\n\r\n```js\r\nimport fs from \"@nod3js/fs\";\r\nimport fs from \"@modejs/fs\";\r\nimport fs from \"@nodejs/fs\"; \r\nimport fs from \"@node/fs\";\r\n```\r\n\r\nAre you going to start registering all scopes that might look similar, for *every* runtime (std, nodejs, and all future technologies)?\r\n\r\nWhat is wrong with just differentiating them?\r\n\r\n```js\r\nimport mod from nodejs \"fs\";\r\nimport pkg from \"@some/thing\";\r\n```\r\n\r\nI'm all for consistency, but this just isn't the same thing."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"glen-84"}}