Hacker News Reader

> So what does the solution look like?

There are no solutions, only trade-offs. And the point is that not everything needs to be, nor ought to be, automated. And package managers are a good point of this.

And yes, a language with an ill-defined concept of a package in the language itself is a problem of the language, but the package managers are not making it any better.

View on HN

> And yes, a language with an ill-defined concept of a package in the language itself is a problem of the language, but the package managers are not making it any better.

If a language does not provide a definition of a package but a package manager _does_, then I would say that that package manager did make that aspect of the problem better.

It makes it worse in my opinion, not better. Because it leads to the problem that other package managers don't agree on what a package is, and it might even lead to the need for an external build system to co-ordinate all of it too. It's a never-ending problem, and is now even worse.

And if the language does provide the definition?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com