Hacker News Reader

Interesting read. Thanks for sharing!

This was created a year ago and Crates.io haven't taken it down so I assume they're ok with it.

It's not surprising. crates.io's stance on squatting or namespacing is to put their fingers in their ears and hope you stop asking them.

https://crates.io/policies#squatting

Eg https://crates.io/users/swmon has squatted 100 empty crates since 2017.

No their stance is to create RFC#3463[0] setting out a policy for handling name squatting and other issues. What they won't do is act unilaterally without a policy and accountability.

[0]: https://github.com/Turbo87/rust-rfcs/blob/crates-io-policy-u...

I'll believe it when they actually do something, such as delete the garbage crates from my second link. These "policies" and "discussions" have been going on since 2014. Note that even your link is not an accepted RFC; it's still being reviewed ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3463 )

You've moving the goalposts. The point is that a written RFC and one that is under review is more than "put their fingers in their ears and hope you stop asking them."

They should probably provide an official way of doing this with manual review.

Indeed, but unfortunately the crates.io team is chronically understaffed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com