On 04.12.2016 15:47, Pirate Praveen wrote: > Those of us feeling weird can go through the list here [1] and see which of > those are weird and help create a patch for their parent module and convince > their upstream to use a patch instead. If you can't convince them, > maintaining a fork would be fine too.
You'd think that the effort to package up [1] would be more than to patch the software using it. Especially when it boils down to a "true" because gulplog is actually a dependency here. I understand why you are annoyed, but some of these are silly. I think we are beyond the "let's collect random modules into big packages" at this point but it's IMO still fair to call out problematic ones like this one. Kind regards Philipp Kern [1] https://github.com/gulpjs/has-gulplog/blob/master/index.js
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
