For me this sounds like FUD.
Sure, you can install a bunch of deps for every small problem, but you don't have to.
If you just take a bit time to think, you can roll your own solution for 90% of the deps, which are tiny packages anyway.
Sure, you can install a bunch of deps for every small problem, but you don't have to.
If you just take a bit time to think, you can roll your own solution for 90% of the deps, which are tiny packages anyway.
I guess I was trying to approach a few concerns beyond just dependencies: learning curve, conventions/standards, framework volatility, and merit assess-ability of ideas.
The more people involved (popularity), the greater the difficulty to parse the merit of an idea without pre-existing competence. How easy is it for a new developer to find a cogent way of doing things in Javascript land compared to a smaller more specific ecosystem? In the smaller ecosystem the experts are easier to determine due to a smaller population, whereas in Javascript-land there's so many people, opinions, articles, and conventional disparities; a much more challenging exercise.
In JS people would install packages for every small problem they have.
Neither is good.
I always check if I can write it myself in reasonable time, if not, I install a package for it.
I'd install React, but I'd write the navigation myself.
I'd install a video-player, but I'd write a SVG animation myself.
etc.